Months after the failed January 28, 2013 gaming referendum, gambling continues to be one of the most divisive ...and unnecessarily distracting issues in The Bahamas

A bad gamble

Gaming Bill resurrects calls for end to discrimination

By CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com

The government of Prime Minister Perry Christie had another bad week last week.

In fact, it seems the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration has been tying itself into one strangling knot after another.

Leading up to the first anniversary of its May 7 victory, it is finding itself increasingly on the defensive and has been making the kinds of moves that awaken public angst and weaken the confidence of citizens in their government.

An increasingly hostile and confusing tone on work permits, a highly publicized immigration blunder at Atlantis resort and the junior national security minister’s suggestion that the Americans are fueling our crime problem by sending us criminal deportees were all matters that caught our attention last week.

But it was public reaction to The Nassau Guardian’s revelation on the proposed Gaming Act 2013, and an announcement that web shop layoffs could come as early as this week, that showed most clearly that the government has a lot of work to do to stem what seems to be rising anti-PLP sentiment.

Months after the failed January 28 referendum, gambling continues to be one of the most divisive and unnecessarily distracting issues in The Bahamas.

In the lead up to that referendum, there was great confusion about the process.

In the weeks and months since, there remains great confusion on the way forward for the web shop sector.

By far, the matter that is dominating national discussion is that proposed act on gambling.

As we reported, it would permit holders of casino licenses in The Bahamas to facilitate online and mobile gambling.

With a deal sealed with Las Vegas’ Cantor Gaming, Atlantis is set to offer its guests mobile gaming as of this week.

Minister of Tourism Obie Wilchcombe, who has responsibility for gaming, said yesterday this will be offered during a “test period” and the property would have to apply for the relevant license to continue mobile gaming and eventually introduce online gaming.

The failed gambling referendum notwithstanding, many people are insulted by the discriminatory bill that would allow Atlantis, Baha Mar and the holders of other casino licenses in The Bahamas to do legally what is being denied Bahamian business people.

The bill has been in the works since shortly after the Christie administration came to office last year.

It was developed outside any considerations connected to the gambling referendum, and the government worked closely with industry stakeholders in its development.

The outrage over the government’s ongoing discriminatory approach to the gambling issue is most understandable when added to the fact that the new bill excludes permanent residents and work permit holders from the class of people not permitted to gamble legally.

The bill speaks only to the prohibition of Bahamian citizens.

Under existing legislation, permanent residents and work permit holders are also prohibited from gambling.

For Bahamians, the move could not be more insulting.

Another provision of the new bill would allow people outside The Bahamas to gamble via the website of a local gaming license holder.

But those people must be in jurisdictions that allow online gambling.

Wilchcombe said there will be tight controls to guard against Bahamians gambling from other jurisdictions.

REFORMS

While Bahamians ought to be concerned over the matter, any hysteria and anger toward the investors who have long been pushing for these industry reforms are misdirected, in my view.

As good and valued investors, Atlantis and Baha Mar deserve to have legislation passed for the protection and improvement of the gaming sector and the tourism industry.

The decision to block Bahamians from gambling in local casinos is not the investors’ decision.

The casino operators in fact have said more than once that they would welcome Bahamians gambling in casinos.

The decision to keep Bahamians from gambling in casinos is the government’s continuation of a controversial and discriminatory decades-old policy.

Wilchcombe said yesterday the policy has served us well and it would need to be carefully examined before any changes are made because there are serious social and economic considerations.

“We have always restricted Bahamians from participating in the gaming activity at our casinos and it was in fact the best compromise for a tourism destination and a country that has a strong opposition from Bahamians participating, particularly the church,” he said, referring to the initial decision on casino gambling several decades ago.

“Way back then, it was a happy compromise and I think that it has proven to be beneficial for the country and it has not hurt The Bahamas.

“We have been able to build an economy without income tax, etc. and it’s really because of our progressive tourism industry, one which included gaming.”

Wilchcombe also rightly pointed to the need and desire for the gaming aspect of tourism to be more competitive — thus the need for the Gaming Bill.

Anyone who takes offense to this bill ought to take that up with their government — not the holders of casino licenses who have for years been working with the government (the former administration included) to effect these necessary reforms for a more competitive gaming industry.

In a paper outlining recommendations for reforms, casino licensees note that in recent years, casino gaming has expanded worldwide.

To stay competitive, the largest jurisdictions have been forced to update their regulations to accommodate shifting consumer tastes, technology and potential sources of new tax revenues, the document points out.

It adds that Nevada, Macau, Singapore, New Jersey and the U.S. Gulf Coast states have structured their laws to reflect recent developments.

Casino operators are hoping the reforms outlined in the Gaming Bill would drive gaming revenues and create a sustainable competitive advantage.

They made 14 recommendations to the government in a document titled “Guide to modernization of casino regulations in The Bahamas”.

One of the recommendations calls for segmented VIP gaming suites and salons. It would allow enclosed gaming rooms to be located anywhere on the resort campus of a licensed casino.

Other recommendations include credit card payments for chips and duty free exemption for gaming equipment and interactive/mobile gaming.

The licensees also proposed the impostion of an entry level for permanent residents and work permit holders.

The document notes that in Singapore, residents must buy a daily pass for US$100 or yearly pass for US$2,000 for casino entry, limiting access to those with financial means.

Wilchcombe said without critical reforms, the gaming sector would lose ground.

THREAT

A separate but very closely related issue involves the web shop industry, which is reportedly suffering under a threat of raids.

Bahamian citizens must continue to demand an end to discrimination on gaming.

Had the referendum passed on January 28, one assumes the government would have been well on its way in structuring a properly regulated web shop sector.

But Bahamian citizens would still have been barred from casino gambling.

The absence of that question from the ballot is one reason some people gave for voting against the regularization and taxation of web shops and the establishment of a national lottery.

It is also the reason some people gave for staying away from the polls altogether.  Voter turnout in fact was less than 50 percent.

Prime Minister Perry Christie has promised that while the casino question was not on the January 28 ballot, it would be a question on the ballot of a promised constitutional referendum if the Constitutional Commission recommends that it be addressed.

It would be unfortunate if the discriminatory nature of the bill derails the industry’s push toward modernization and reform.

But the failed referendum should not be taken as a true reflection of the views of the electorate on gambling.

Had the government taken its time and addressed gambling for Bahamians in its totality and in a clear process where adequate information was provided, it might have avoided anger and confusion over this very necessary step it is taking for casino owners.

Bahamian businessespeople who have for years been operating web shops now feel like second-class citizens, as do Bahamians who are being told about the provision that would provide for work permit holders and permanent residents to take part in an industry they have been told to keep out.

Wilchcombe has said the Cabinet will review the bill tomorrow.

Perhaps it would also examine why so many people have reacted so strongly against it.

April 29, 2013

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Domestic Violence in The Bahamas... ...The Bahamas is among countries that have a very high level of lethal violence against women... ...reluctance on the part of law enforcement authorities to intervene in domestic disputes

Violence Against Women A Widespread Problem, Says Us

By RUPERT MISSICK Jr

 

 

 

 

VIOLENCE against women continues to be a “serious, widespread problem” in the Bahamas, a newly released 2012 human rights report from the US Embassy allegeges.

 

In August of last year, the police reported that 464 domestic violence cases were registered in 2011, representing the highest recorded in the previous three years. One third of the 1,285 interventions conducted by the Bahamas Crisis Centre (BCC) in 2011 related to domestic violence, and the centre experienced similar trends during the year.

 

The country’s record with regard to its treatment of women has been documented by other organisations as well.

 

The Bahamas is listed by The Small Arms Survey – an independent research project located at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, Switzerland – as being among countries that have a very high level of lethal violence against women – six women per 100,000 of the female population.

 

According to The Small Arms Survey, firearms play a major role in these deaths.

 

“Many women report having been threatened with a firearm before they fall victim to a (murder). Firearms in the home similarly represent an increased risk to women as they are more likely to be used to threaten and inflict harm on family members than to protect the home from intruders.”

 

In July, the police commissioner reported that many of the murders that took place were related to domestic violence, and another official indicated that 45 per cent of all homicides over the last 20 years could be attributed to domestic violence.

 

Ten women were killed during 2012, compared with 16 in 2011.

 

According to the report, women’s rights groups cited some reluctance on the part of law enforcement authorities to intervene in domestic disputes.

 

The BCC worked with police by providing them with a counsellor referral service to utilise when encountering rape victims.

 

“In June, a minister of state called for the BCC to change its policy of requiring those in need of counselling to come to the centre rather than dispatching volunteers to people’s homes. The BCC director pointed out that none of the centre’s staff are paid and reiterated that police should be the first point of contact for domestic disputes,” the report said.

 

The report pointed out that while rape is illegal, the law does not protect against spousal rape, except if the couple is separating, in the process of divorce, or if there is a restraining order in place.

 

The maximum penalty for an initial rape conviction is seven years; the maximum for subsequent rape convictions is life imprisonment.

 

The report points out however, that in practice, the maximum conviction was 14 years. Survivors reported 97 rapes during the year compared with 107 in 2011 – when authorities initiated only 40 prosecutions for rape.

 

Authorities declined to provide more recent figures.

 

April 25, 2013

 

Tribune242

 

Caribbean Blog International

 

Bahamas Petroleum Company (BPC) says it expects to find crude oil in The Bahamas

BPC Expects To Strike Oil

By Jones Bahamas:

Efforts to find oil off Cuba may have failed, but the Bahamas Petroleum Company (BPC) – the only explorer searching for oil off the Atlantic archipelago – says it expects to find crude oil in The Bahamas.

BPC CEO Simon Potter recently noted that a seismic study by his company showed that the Great Bahama Bank may have oil at shallower water depths, making it easier to drill, and a layer of salt keeping the crude in place.

BPC is currently looking for a partner to raise at least $100 million to drill the country’s first exploration well in about 27 years.

It holds five licences covering more than 4 billion barrels of potential oil resources and is seeking three more with Statoil ASA.

Last month, the Christie administration gave BPC the green light to explore for oil.

Environment Minister Kenred Dorsett said the government wants to first see if there is oil in The Bahamas before proceeding with a voter referendum.

“Let’s go and bake the cake, let’s establish commercial reserves,” Mr. Potter said. Should a discovery be made, “there’ll be a much more positive issue to be managing.”

Mr. Potter has already noted that oil extraction could help The Bahamas reduce its mounting debt.

Government borrowings rose to 53 percent of gross domestic product last year from 32 percent in 2007, according to a December report by Moody’s Investors Service.

However, environmentalists are leery about drilling for oil, noting that it could destroy The Bahamas’ precious natural resources.

22 April, 2013

The Bahama Journal

Caribbean Blog International

Bahamas Electricity Corporation (BEC) is in crisis... ...The dysfunctional state of the corporation is having harmful effects on The Bahamas... ...And now BEC’s debt burden could hurt the country’s credit rating

BEC and the government’s debt position

The Nassau Guardian Editorial

The Bahamas Electricity Corporation (BEC) is in crisis. It has a quarter of a billion dollars in debt the government has to back, it may lose $50 million this year and it is unable to provide enough power to keep the lights on in the high-demand summer season.

Successive political administrations have made all kinds of decisions over the last decade that have brought BEC to its knees. The dysfunctional state of the corporation is now increasingly having harmful effects on The Bahamas.

The high cost of power produced by BEC serves as a large across-the-board tax on Bahamians, increasing the cost of goods and services. The summer blackouts inconvenience businesses and homeowners. And now BEC’s debt burden could hurt the country’s credit rating.

Moody’s is warning the government that rising debt held by public sector corporations such as BEC could hurt the country’s rating going forward. According to its latest credit opinion, The Bahamas retains its negative outlook due to the difficulty in achieving fiscal consolidation necessary to stabilize debt and increase revenue in the short term. A failure to reverse the recent trend of rising debt will place downward pressure on the country’s future rating, the report added, particularly with the “crystallization” of liabilities held by BEC.

The Bahamas’ bond rating was downgraded to Baa1 from A3 last December.

The government says it has 60 energy proposals before it and it is in the process of reviewing those proposals. One of those proposals is from SGI Global Holdings Ltd. It is represented by attorney John Bostwick and thinks a power barge concept makes far more sense than any of the other energy proposals before the government.

Executives from the firm have drafted a proposal arguing it could slash the average cost of electricity from $0.40 per kilowatt-hour to $0.28 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) in the first year if allowed to enter the marketplace. In year seven, the international firm says it could reduce the cost of electricity to $0.25 per kWh.

At some point, the government has to make a decision on the “major change” it will create in the local energy sector. The status quo is a barrier to economic growth, an annoyance to the public and it harms the Bahamian credit position.

If private firms are able to enter the market and assist the government by providing energy at lower rates than BEC, why not quickly move to allow private firms to assist?

We are at the end of the first year of this Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) term. It went by quickly. Despite all the talk thus far about BEC and energy, under the PLP BEC continues to spiral. A paradigm shift is needed in the Bahamian energy sector.

If the PLP waits too long to decide on this change The Bahamas will be further harmed, more money will be wasted and the change desired may not take effect until after the next general election, as energy plants take time to set up.

We hope the Cabinet understands that success in bringing down the cost of power is as much a priority now as our crime and unemployment problems.

April 20, 2013

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Fred Mitchell on What it means to be Bahamian... ...Bahamian identity ...and the public policy carried out by the Department of Immigration

Urgent Reform Needed For Immigration Crisis

By NOELLE NICOLLS

nnicolls@tribunemedia.net

 

 

 

EVER since I read the Sir Lynden O. Pindling Distinguished Lecture of 2003 by then Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Public Service Fred Mitchell – “What it means to be Bahamian” – I have wanted to confront Mr Mitchell on the remarkable inconsistency between what he articulated as his personal views on Bahamian identity and the public policy carried out by the Department of Immigration.

 

In his presentation, Mr Mitchell refreshingly articulated what in Bahamian terms would be considered very liberal views on immigration and what I consider a conscious opinion on Bahamian identity. And yet, the policy of the Government of the Bahamas, regardless of its political administration, has never lived up to such an ideal.

 

In fact, public policy has shown blatant indifference towards the human cost of the immigration crisis and the flawed process that many have had to endure.

 

Speaking at an immigration forum hosted by the Bahamas National Youth Council (BNYC) in collaboration with The College of the Bahamas’ School of Social Sciences and the School of Communication and Creative Arts, a Bahamian man described his 30-year battle to claim citizenship for his daughter.

 

She is a woman in her 30s with three children and the Department of Immigration has yet to fully process her application. Her mother is a Jamaican and she was born to her parents out of wedlock. To some misguided Bahamians that is a national shame. An immigration officer told the Bahamian man after he complained about his daughter’s documents being lost for the umpteenth time over the past 30 years that he should not have been with a Jamaican woman.

 

The Bahamian man rattled off the names of practically every minister responsible for immigration since independence, claiming no reprieve under any of them. He flew from Grand Bahama specifically for the forum and an opportunity to plead his case with the current minister in a public setting.

 

Can we as Bahamians stop to think, just for a moment, to empathise with someone like this Bahamian man? For more than 30 years he has had to suffer the inconvenience of the process and the indignity of not being able to call his own daughter, who was born and raised on native soil, a Bahamian.

 

And now, his three grandchildren have to endure further dishonour.

 

Yes, they are eligible to apply for Jamaican citizenship by virtue of their mother’s ancestry, so they are not stateless, but the Bahamas is their home and they have every right to want their country to formally recognize them as one of their own. They should not have to wait 30 years, and endure the stink attitude of an immigration officer to do so.

 

Why is it that instead of being shamed into action over this man’s 30 year battle, an immigration officer would offer him such a presumptuous and disrespectful comment like the one made? What kind of environment have we fostered to allow such an attitude to be considered acceptable?

 

Immigration consultants paint an extremely disheartening picture of the conduct of some civil servants at immigration, claiming a “culture of slackness, prejudice and a general don’t care attitude” is pervasive.

 

“There is a woman who doesn’t deal with anyone who is not upper class. If you are not white and don’t have no money, she is not making an appointment for you, off the bat,” said an immigration consultant.

 

Applicants from non-Commonwealth countries, “(immigration officers) don’t feel obligated to them”. The law does not say to treat them differently; “but the people, they feel a certain bias and they would not push it”.

 

“Sometimes they will carry a person through the ropes when they don’t need it. A lot of Haitians don’t know their fathers. Immigration knows that, but because they know it will cause them a while to get that information, they say hey, let’s send them for that stuff,” said the consultant.

 

Applicants must respond in 90 days to certain requests, such as notifications for an interview with an immigration officer. One applicant claimed the letters are deliberately sent out at the last minute, so applicants miss the 90-day time period, thereby delaying the process even further. If a single item is missing from an application, such as a photo or police record, that application might sit lingering, because no one is willing to make a simple call. “They are going to write a letter knowing that the postal service takes forever.”

 

Amongst the workers, there is allegedly a general distrust of certain governments, such as Haiti, Cuba and the Dominican Republic. “We know their governments are willing to help them get in another country,” said an immigration officer. On the other hand, it is believed that other countries “wouldn’t lie”, or that “they don’t like to give up their citizens”, so they are trusted more.

 

“If a Jamaican student wants to apply, Jamaica will mean to take three, four months just to hold them up, because Jamaica doesn’t like to give up their citizens,” the civil servant said. The distrust is compounded by the illegal trade in counterfeit documents, pedaled by immigrants themselves and Bahamians.

 

Where it is possible for an officer to see six to seven individuals in a day, some workers might see only three people in a week. “What they do with the rest of their time, listen to the radio, talk on the phone, maybe look at a file once or twice.”

 

“They could really make your life hell. There are people there who get off on putting your life through hell. They feel they are doing well for the Bahamas when it is actually creating more problems. You have some good set who will try, but it is not enough,” said an immigration consultant.

 

There is an urgent need for standards and transparency in the naturalization process. The system is flawed: it is too arbitrary and the bureaucracy is too corrupt.

 

It is amazing that individual employees have the power to bring their personal isms to the job and implement their own personal policies to undermine the process so incredibly, when not even the minister has the power to shape the government’s official policies according to his own personal convictions.

 

Mr Mitchell delivered the keynote address at COB’s immigration forum. He prefaced his presentation by stating clearly that he was speaking about public policy; that his personal views could be found in his 2003 lecture. Interestingly, in 2003, Mr Mitchell prefaced his speech by saying he was speaking personally in the context of an academic setting and that his views should not be interpreted as public policy.

 

Should we not judge our political leaders according to their personal convictions and then expect them to carry those positions forward in public policy? I wanted to put the question to Mr Mitchell ever since I read his 2003 address. I finally had my chance, not to practice gotcha journalism; to the contrary, some of his 2003 views are extremely informative, and I wish only that they could be reflected in public policy today. Some of the problems we experience could be resolved if we could address the challenges that arise from the legal definition of who is a Bahamian.

 

Mr Mitchell argued in his 2003 address, the legal definition of a Bahamian created under the newly formed constitution of 1973 “made it harder not easier to deal with the question of who belongs to The Bahamas”.

 

It seems no one at the time realised how messy the legal definition was and “the absolute public policy nightmare that the definition created”.

 

The law sets up a tiered system that establishes different claims to citizenship according to gender, marital status, place of birth and ancestry. And as stated, the government’s policies are further complicated by the individual biases of immigration officers, who allegedly invent their own criteria to establish an individual’s right or claim to citizenship.

 

The post-independence legal definition established a split “from the qualifying legal concept before Independence but also from what was considered Bahamian in the social and cultural sense and in our common understanding both prior to and after independence.”

 

Notwithstanding the technicalities of law, as a Bahamian woman, regardless of my marital status or where my child is born, I have an expectation within my social consciousness that my child will be Bahamian, because socially and culturally Bahamians apply a different standard and have different expectations of who is a Bahamian. But the reality is, depending on my circumstance, there may be no automatic legal right to citizenship for my child, or even a valid claim.

 

There are also examples of immigrants who are accepted in the society to the extent that they are excelling in school, receiving national honours, paying taxes and have functional careers, established businesses and communities; in other words, for social and cultural purposes they are Bahamian, but in the absence of a standardized and transparent system, according to someone’s arbitrary position, they can be dismissed as illegals and refused legal status.

 

Immigrants are functioning in society in spite of the system, not because the system empowers them to do so. Not that they should be empowered in any special way, but they should not be discriminated against arbitrarily.

 

At the COB forum, Natacha Jn-Simon discovered for the first time that her Certificate of Identification (CIF) did not entitle her to work in the Bahamas. She is a born and raised, not-yet-Bahamian College of the Bahamas student. Since she applied for citizenship on her 18th birthday, Natacha is now on the indefinite wait-and-see track that has kept some Bahamians in limbo for decades. In the meantime, if she now wishes to work, her employer has to pay for an annual work permit to hire her legally.

 

“I was surprised. It shows the stupidity of the laws. What is really a disturbance is that you can sit in a classroom for 12 years with people, but because you don’t have a (Bahamian) passport you don’t have the same rights as them,” said Natacha the C R Walker High School graduate, who is now a freshman at COB.

 

The irony is that many of the leaders who in essence cemented this problem, those who created the current restrictive and culturally contradictive legal definition of who is a Bahamian, were first generation Bahamians themselves, having at least one foreign parent. Some of them would not have met the standards for automatic citizenship.

 

Mr Mitchell made an important statement in 2003 that holds currency today and should be our guiding objective: “I would argue here that we must try as we move forward to ensure that the legal definition of who is a Bahamian comes as close as possible to the social or cultural definition of who is a Bahamian. My argument is that this is in the best interest of our country as we move forward in this century. It is in my view in the best interests of the sovereignty and independence of this country to be inclusive in our legal definition as Bahamians, not exclusive.”

 

He said birth and ancestry should be considered for Bahamian citizenship, but not necessarily in tandem.

 

“They can be separate legal bases for the claim of citizenship. In other words, you ought to get to Bahamian citizenship either by birth or by ancestry, whether married or not and whether through the male or female lines,” stated Mr Mitchell.

 

So what happened to those views? Where is the public policy to reflect them?

 

Mr Mitchell stands by his 2003 view. He even agrees, “You are supposed to bring your individual consciousness to government policy”. However, he said the government is a body corporate, and “a work in progress” at that. As an agent of that body (when in government), he and all other public officials represent government policy.

 

*That position hardly seems acceptable, albeit true. As the minister, his personal views are not irrelevant, but they do not change the fact that his actions are constrained by the official policies he is charged to carry out. However, he could still be a vocal advocate for his positions. We need more champions at the level of national leadership speaking to these issues.

 

Unfortunately, there is not enough like-minded conviction amongst the true power brokers of government to move the process forward in a progressive way. Indeed, the vast majority of Bahamians have far more conservative views on immigration – some of them motivated by a misplaced fear of certain foreign nationals taking over the country.

 

In one vein they rail about the Bahamas being so small, and its vulnerability to population inflows, and in another they lament the Bahamas being so under-populated that it desperately needs controlled migration for economic development. But it seems controlled migration is only okay for certain immigrants.

 

Mr Mitchell has asked to appear before the Constitutional Commission. When he appears, he is undecided about whether he will speak to his previous positions. Either way, however, he said he plans to urge the commission to make recommendations to expand rights instead of contracting them.

 

“The constitution is not meant to contract rights. If you cannot expand those rights then leave the constitution where it is. The principle of the constitution is to amplify rights and to protect people’s rights. If you can’t, then leave it as is,” said Mr Mitchell at the COB forum.

 

There is no doubt in my mind the legal definition of citizenship should be amended. If I was born in the Bahamas, come of age in the Bahamas, and seek to contribute in a positive way to the development of the society, my claim to citizenship should be a birthright, not some arbitrary decision. It is simply the fair thing to do.

 

We should move away from our present exclusive position in which people of dual heritage are forced to choose, or where one’s heritage alone is not sufficient to embrace someone as Bahamian.

 

We are far from having a national consensus on these points. If a constitutional referendum were to be held today it would fail miserably, because Bahamians are stubbornly unwilling to do away with the outmoded and discriminatory standards of determining who is a Bahamian.

 

And Bahamians are unwilling to formally accept immigrants or the children of immigrants amongst their ranks, regardless of their ancestral connections or birthplace, even though they are in many cases already active members of our communities. Bahamians will use the labour of immigrants to build the country – in education, in the uniformed divisions, in business – but they will not accept them as Bahamian.

 

It cannot be denied the current process we have to determine who is a Bahamian is unfair; it is not standardized and it is not transparent. The conflict between the laws in place and the social and cultural norms create unnecessary and harmful social tensions. And we need to do better.

 

• Follow Noelle Nicolls on Twitter @noelle_elleon.

 

April 15, 2013

 

Tribune 242

 

Caribbean Blog International 

We want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth concerning the disposition of the people’s money at the National Insurance Board (NIB)

Come Clean on NIB

The Bahama Journal Editorial



That matter concerning who did what, who decided who should get what and that matter which concerns money in the care of the National Insurance Board is one that should be decided now.

The Hon. Shane Gibson is himself clear enough in his mind as to what should be done. Like us he seems to be on the side of those Bahamians who know that whatever is to be done should be executed now rather than later. As one news report suggests: – “…National Insurance Minister Shane Gibson said he is already satisfied [in his mind] “what course of action we should take” based on the findings of the audit into the National Insurance Board.

Decisions made by NIB board members “based on the information (they) had when they were first appointed, seem to be justified…it went way beyond where we thought it would go and so we don’t want to make any rushed judgment or decision; we want to think about it carefully.

But I can guarantee you one thing, at the end of the day – it will be made public and it’s just a matter of when…” Just a matter of when is not good enough. Whatever is to be done should be done now. We need to know all that the Minister and whomever else already knows the whodunit questions and the corresponding answers.

In his statement of the obvious, Minister Gibson says that, “…As soon as we make a decision based on the recommendations of the AG’s Office, then one of two things will happen:- “He will either return to work or he won’t return to work.” We all must wait to hear, see and understand what the Attorney-General’s Office has to say on the matter concerning the stewardship of the people’s money.

The time is now for demanding that the Hon. Shane Gibson show and tell the Bahamian people all that he knows concerning whatever it is that has come to light in the aftermath of that forensic audit into the affairs of the National Insurance Board ordered and/or sanctioned by his colleagues in the Cabinet. And let it be known that we shall have none of that good old fudge that some among us are prepared to feast on when there is information in hand that might hurt this or that favored character of ours’.

The chips – as they say – should be allowed to fly where ever they may. Very many other right-thinking Bahamians want to know about what really did go down at National Insurance to cause all the furor and innuendo that now engulf a number of current and former employees of that star-crossed government owned entity.

Not only do we want to know what happened, we want to know if anyone is going to be charged with any wrong-doing. And most of all, we take this opportunity to let this administration know that the Bahamian people want them to come clean and let the chips fall where they may. And lest there be some other mistake concerning the extent of the people’s justified anger about what they have heard concerning the National Insurance issue, these people are also angry because things are tough for them. They are therefore in no mood to turn a blind eye on this scandal.

The hurt for many continues, so too does the gravy train hum for some others who are mired in games now being played out in other sectors of this or that state-owned entity. Enough remains enough! In addition, as we look in on scandal’s NIB face, we are reminded of the fact that this nation now reels not only at the hammer blows inflicted by a world-economy over which it has little to no real control, but that the so-called man in the street now cowers in the cold shadow of poverty on the hoof.

An ever expectant people now demand transparency, accountability and responsibility from all who lead and all who would lead. But above all else, the Bahamian people demand action, results and transparency from those elected to serve them. In addition, they are now demanding the same from all those nameless, faceless bureaucrats who work with, for and under the command of politicians. We too need to know whether the National Insurance Fund has been pillaged and somehow or the other been diverted from their proper use.

Put simply:-We want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth concerning the disposition of the people’s money.

April 17, 2013

Jones Bahamas

Caribbean Blog International

...do we have a progressive consumer protection environment in The Bahamas

Consumer protection in The Bahamas

Consider This...

BY PHILIP C. GALANIS

An educated consumer is our best customer. – Sy Syms

In the 1980s, in an effort to educate TV viewers, clothier Sy Syms frequently reminded his audience that, “An educated consumer is our best customer.”  He was a pioneer in consumer education and empowerment and persons like consumer advocate Ralph Nader were also well known for protecting the average consumer.

This week, we would like to Consider This... do we have a progressive consumer protection environment in The Bahamas?

Consumer protection laws

Consumer protection is often provided by laws and organizations that are designed to ensure consumers’ rights and to foster fair trade competition and the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace.

Consumer protection laws are designed to prevent businesses from engaging in fraudulent or unfair practices that would enable them to gain an unfair advantage over competitors or to mislead consumers.  Governments often use consumer protection laws to regulate businesses from such practices or to protect the rights of consumers.  For example, the United Kingdom has several statutes to protect consumers in specific areas of consumer credit and contract terms.  The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, along with individual state consumer affairs agencies, are responsible for consumer protection.  Germany has a federal Cabinet minister who is responsible for consumer rights and protection.  In India, the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 governs consumer protection.  The Bahamas Parliament passed a Consumer Protection Act of 2006 which is intended to provide consumers who are disadvantaged by exorbitant prices, substandard products and the unscrupulous practices of merchants and service providers with a forum to have their complaints addressed on a timely basis by a consumer protection commission.  The law requires merchants and service providers to be more accountable and ensures that in their dealings with consumers, value is exchanged for goods and services provided.

The Bahamian experience

Today there are many areas where consumer protection can be greatly enhanced in The Bahamas.  For example, in the area of commercial banking, we are familiar with the practice of some banks overcharging their customers for various “services” of which consumers are unaware until they are referred to the fine print in the bank mandates – a document that 99.9 percent of consumers fail to read or understand when opening bank accounts.  In some circumstances, when called out, commercial banks have had to reverse such charges.  Unless the vigilant consumer closely scrutinizes his bank statement, he could end up paying excessive charges that are neither substantiated nor justified.

Then there is the famous “float”.  Notwithstanding the introduction of an automatic check clearing system, it is commonplace for commercial banks to hastily withdraw funds from customers’ accounts, while simultaneously placing a “hold” on deposited funds for several days.  The consequence is that this practice puts the customer’s account into overdraft, resulting in bank charges of as much as $25 for having “insufficient funds” on the account because the deposited funds were still “on hold”.  Unfortunately there is absolutely no one to whom the consumer can turn for relief from this practice, not even the Central Bank.

Then there are well-known cases where many consumers have experienced enormous encounters with essential service providers, especially in the areas of telephony and electricity.  Since our telephone company, BaTelCo, was “given away” by an incompetent government on the ill-conceived advice of equally incompetent advisors, the delivery of quality service by that public corporation has drastically deteriorated.  Prior to that ill-fated sale of one of our most precious national assets, BaTelCo was managed by Bahamians and, while there were intermittent complaints about the delivery of quality of service, the experience of the “new and unimproved” BTC is now nothing short of cataclysmic.  It is virtually impossible to complete a cellular call without that call dropping off the network.  And never before in the history of telephony in The Bahamas have landline consumers experienced such difficulty in placing simple local calls or obtaining timely service when experiencing problems.  To whom can the consumer turn for protection?  The theoretical answer is URCA, but the practical answer is “not a soul”.  There is no penalty, no protection and no compensation.

In the past two years, in the wake of the historically worst-managed capital project in the life of our Commonwealth, namely the New Providence Road Improvement Project, we have repeatedly experienced electrical blackouts, ostensibly from road workers who accidently and inadvertently cut power lines while trenching our roads.  This has resulted in thousands of man-hours in lost productivity in a myriad of businesses and incalculable inconvenience to individuals and households.  From whom can consumers so affected seek redress for the lost hours of work, the damage to appliances and the general disruption of life resulting from such “accidents”?  In truth and in fact, the answer is “no one”.  There is no consumer protection.

Cable TV and Internet service might not quite qualify as essential services, although some might argue to the contrary, but we are all familiar with the repeated disruptions that many consumers experience from Cable Bahamas.  Again, it is very difficult to expect any real satisfaction for such disruptions from the agency that is supposed to protect consumers from abuses by the cable company. URCA, which does little to compensate consumers from telephone company abuses, performs an equally deplorable job in protecting cable TV and Internet consumers from poor service.

Then we have regulated products such as food and fuel.  There are certain foods that are price-controlled at our food stores.  The real question that an educated consumer should ask is whether the Price Control Commission methodically monitors foods that are subjected to price control.  It is extremely rare that we hear of food stores being sanctioned for pricing breaches by the Price Control Commission.  Is this because the food stores are virtually compliant or have they been able to circumvent the price control regime?  It is not an exceptional experience for consumers to observe vastly different prices on various food items.  Is this also the case with respect to price-controlled items?

The price of fuel is also regulated and importers and end-service providers are allowed to earn pre-determined margins.  Who monitors the pricing behavior of service providers to ensure that the consumer is not being gouged at the fuel pump?  We do not frequently, if ever, hear of any violations of the established margins by fuel merchants or of any penalties imposed for attendant breaches.

Finally, the Bahamian consumer needs protection relative to local food production and distribution.  In the absence of any sanitary and phytosanitary standards relative to the production of food, plants and vegetables, the all-important question of food safety will remain elusive at best and questionable at worst.  One of the benefits of the country’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) is that such standards must be established.  However, until those standards relative to food, plant and vegetable production, harvesting and distribution are implemented and enforced, consumers will never know just how safe the food is that they are consuming.

Conclusion

It is vitally important for all Bahamians to be educated and vigilant about our rights as consumers and to whom we can turn for abuses or violations to be redressed.  Until we become educated consumers, we will not be good customers.  Instead, we will indeterminately wander and wallow in the quagmire of ignorance and abuse.  We must no longer put up with things we should not even tolerate for a moment.  We must become empowered to not only stop those abuses for ourselves but end them for each and every Bahamian consumer.

 

• 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

April 15, 2013

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International