Michael Pintard is the Free National Movement (FNM) Problem!

The FNM Has a Michael Pintard Problem!!!!

By James Julmis

The Free National Movement has many problems, but one sits at the centre of them all: Michael Pintard.

After another national rejection, the FNM can no longer pretend that its problem is messaging, timing, money, or machinery.  Those things matter in politics, but leadership sits above all of them.  A party can recover from bad strategy.  A party can recover from poor campaign planning.  A party can recover from division.  What it cannot easily recover from is a leader the public has already decided against.

That is the political burden Michael Pintard now carries.

The Bahamian people have listened to him.  They have watched him.  They have measured him.  They have seen him in Parliament, on the campaign trail, in press conferences, and in moments when serious leadership was required.  Their answer has been clear.  They have declined to follow him.

That is the hard truth the FNM must now face.

Pintard has struggled to connect with ordinary Bahamians because he often sounds like a man speaking at people rather than with them.  His politics feels rehearsed, distant, and overly calculated.  He talks about the people, but he has failed to make the people feel that he truly knows their daily lives, their pressures, their fears, and their hopes.

Politics is about trust.  It is about whether people can look at a leader and say, “That person understands me.”  With Pintard, too many Bahamians see performance without connection.  They see volume without warmth.  They see criticism without comfort.  They see ambition without a clear reason to believe.

This is why the FNM has a Pintard problem.

The party may want to blame the PLP.  It may want to blame the timing of the election.  It may want to blame the media, the voters, or the national mood.  But none of that changes the result.  The public looked at the choice placed before them and decided that Michael Pintard was unready to lead the country.

That judgment cannot be brushed aside.

The FNM must ask itself a serious question: if Michael Pintard could not persuade the country after years in opposition, after repeated opportunities to define himself, and after a campaign built around removing the government, what evidence is there that the public will suddenly see him differently?

There comes a point when a party must stop protecting a leader from political reality.

Pintard’s weakness is deeper than one election cycle.  It is about temperament, image, connection, and credibility.  He has never found a language that reaches beyond the FNM base.  He has never fully settled the question of who he is as a national leader.  He has never made Bahamians feel that he carries the emotional weight of the country.

That is why he remains limited.

The Bahamian people may disagree with the government on issues.  They may complain about the cost of living, crime, bureaucracy, and the pressure of daily life.  But disagreement with the government does automatically become support for the opposition.  The FNM assumed public frustration would be enough. It was wrong.

People may want better.  That does not mean they want Pintard.

This is the central failure of his leadership.  He has been unable to turn public concern into public confidence.  He has been unable to turn criticism of the government into belief in himself.  He has been unable to make the FNM feel like a government-in-waiting.

That is a personal political failure.

The FNM must now decide whether it wants to keep managing Pintard’s image or begin rebuilding the party.  It cannot do both.  A party serious about renewal must be honest about why the public pulled away.  It must listen to what the country has already said.

Bahamians have made their judgment.

They do not see Michael Pintard as the answer.

And until the FNM accepts that, it will continue to confuse movement with progress, noise with leadership, and opposition with readiness.

The FNM has a Michael Pintard problem.

The longer it denies it, the longer it will remain exactly where the Bahamian people have placed it: in opposition.

Source / Comment

The Corrupt Nature of Bahamian Politics in The Bahamas

Election Politics in The Bahamas: Who gets to eat - and who doesn't

By Craig Butler:

Bahamian elections are too often not about governance.  They are about access.

Access to contracts.  Access to appointments.  Access to the Treasury.  That is the sickness.

The winning party does not merely win office.  It gains control over how roughly $1 billion in public contracts is distributed.

And too often the real contest is not over policy; it is over who gets fed.

That is not nation-building.  That is budget politics dressed up as democracy.

Source / Comment

The Honourable Marvin Dames, and The Deceitful Progressive Liberal Party - PLP

The Hon. Marvin Dames, and The Prudent Drone Contract Honoured by The Ruling Philip 'Brave' Davis Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Administration

Marvin Dames' Righteous Vision for A Secured Bahamian Nation - The Bahamas

Recent claims about the drone contract under former Minister Marvin Dames are misleading.  For over three decades, he has served with integrity and distinction in global law enforcement, yet political narratives now attempt to tarnish his reputation.

Misleading statements and outright lies have become a common tactic of the Progressive Liberal Party.  For more than three decades, Marvin Dames has served at the highest levels of law enforcement, both in our country and internationally.  He has built a reputation that has earned him the utmost respect from the global law enforcement community, a reputation that continues to be upheld today.

However, his political adversaries, in their attempts to tarnish his character, resort to using surrogates to spread a lie.  Unlike many of his critics, Mr. Dames has a reputation that precedes him.  He has established relationships based on professionalism, honor, respect, and integrity.

Let’s unpack the falsehoods propagated by the PLP through their surrogates:

1.⁠ ⁠No Corruption.  No Scandal.

The official audit of the drone contract (2021–2022), a public document by the Auditor General, found no wrongdoing.

•⁠ ⁠No suspicious payments

•⁠ ⁠No side deals

•⁠ ⁠No missing money

The audit speaks for itself.

2. More Than Drones: A Vision for National Security

This was never just about purchasing drones.  The plan included establishing a Centre of Excellence and a training academy to build skills and capacity in drone technology.

The purpose of the academy is to train the next generation of drone pilots in The Bahamas and across the Caribbean region.  Key areas of focus include law enforcement, with partnerships involving the Royal Bahamas Police Force, the Royal Bahamas Defence Force, Immigration, Lands and Surveys, the Disaster Risk Management Authority, and others.  Training opportunities have also been extended internationally.

The former Minister and the FNM were forward-thinking in this regard.

It is also important to highlight that Marvin Dames built an impeccable reputation in global law enforcement circles over three decades.  He has led some of the most critical divisions of the Royal Bahamas Police Force, including the Drug Enforcement Unit (DEU), the Central Detective Unit (CDU), and the Central Intelligence Unit (CIU).

He earned respect worldwide for his knowledge, experience, spotless character, and integrity, qualities often missing in political life today.  Why would anyone attempt to discredit a man whose leadership helped dismantle international criminal networks and whose reputation still stands firm today?

 3. Who Chose the Vendor?  Not the Minister.

A committee of senior government officials; NOT the Minister, handled the bidding process.  Multiple local and international firms submitted proposals.

The committee carefully reviewed all bids and recommended the company that was most suitable, realistic, and cost-effective at the time.  The winning bid was not only capable and aligned with government policy but also well under budget, compared to competing bids exceeding $30 million.

For clarity:

•⁠ ⁠The Minister did not choose the company.

•⁠ ⁠Payments were processed strictly through the Ministry of Finance and the Treasury.

 4. COVID Changed the Timeline, But the Plan Continued.

When the pandemic struck, budgets shifted.  Out of the $17 million contract, only a small portion was paid by the FNM government before the 2021 election.  The vast majority of payments were left to be honored by the present administration.

Importantly, the vendor adjusted with no penalties, and the program continued under the PLP.

So why insist on playing political games, using surrogates to tarnish the good name of one of our most respected citizens, when the very same company is still being engaged by the current administration?

Even the former Commodore, in his farewell speech at the inauguration of Commodore Floyd Moxey, commended the Drone Academy for its work.

If the accusations are real, then let those making them come forward and show their faces.  Stop hiding behind surrogates.  The Bahamian people deserve honesty and accountability, not shadows and whispers.

 5. Results You Can See.

The drone program was part of a broader modernization strategy championed by Marvin Dames, which also introduced:

•⁠ ⁠ShotSpotter technology to detect gunfire

•⁠ ⁠Body cameras for officers

•⁠ ⁠A Real Time Crime Center (RTCC)

•⁠ ⁠Revitalized national CCTV coverage, which was nonfunctional before he took office

The PLP often claims that the FNM had no crime plan.  But the truth is, their own crime plan was simply to continue the very initiatives launched by the FNM and Marvin Dames. Instead of acknowledging this, they go to great lengths to discredit him.

 6. The Real Question: Why Hide the Success?

Why downplay a program that continues to protect our borders and support law enforcement operations daily?

They use surrogates to spread falsehoods about an alleged $17 million “misappropriation,” knowing full well that the FNM government disbursed only a fraction of that amount.  The majority of the $17 million remains under the present administration’s responsibility as the contract continues to be fulfilled.

If this was a corrupt deal, why is the current government still paying the same vendor and operating the same program?

 7. The Facts Are Clear.

To clarify:

•⁠ ⁠The Ministry of Finance alone is responsible for disbursing payments to vendors.

•⁠ ⁠The Minister did not choose the company awarded the bid. A committee of senior government officials, spanning RBPF, RBDF, Corrections, Finance, and others, led the process. The Minister had no interactions with the company or its executives.

•⁠ ⁠The Minister did not benefit from the bid.

•⁠ ⁠Less than $1 million was disbursed under the FNM administration.

•⁠ ⁠This was a Cabinet-backed policy decision, validated by an independent audit and implemented by independent officials.

Source / Comment

Branville 'The proven snake' McCartney Bombastically Speaks

FNM 'Judas' Branville McCartney Arrogantly Advises The FNM!

Stay out of FNM Business, Mr. Branville McCartney

By Dennis A. Dames
Nassau, The Bahamas

Did you hear that foul piece of political ordure which the FNM traitor, Branville McCartney so arrogantly advised to the party - that he so cruelly abandoned?  He had the audacity to gave counsel to the FNM about giving the former party leader Dr. Hubert Minnis a nomination to run in The next general election.

How politically arrogant could a turncoat become?  No one with sense in the Free National Movement – FNM party takes Branville ‘The proven snake’ McCartney seriously.

His beloved Democratic National Alliance – DNA still exists, but is presently on life support and is only in need of some intense loving boost to live a bit more - to simply add some cash to the public treasury.

Go and revive your needy political house, Mr.  McCartney, and invite your cousin – Dr. Hubert Minnis to be its leader.  That way, you and your sweetheart of a coz could get a royal cut-hip to safely propel both of you into the nearest political graveyard – once and for all mon.

The Decline of The Bahamas

The Steady Decline of The Bahamian Nation - The Bahamas

By Dennis Dames
Nassau, The Bahamas

The public's perception of the Royal Bahamas Police Force (RBPF) is at an all time crying low - in my view. Recent bad news about the Force and some of its Officers has added unfavourably to how the Bahamian people see the Police, and their organization.

The Coroners Court has concluded lately that a number of Police Officers have committed manslaughter in the excution of their duties. This has left a totally bad taste in the mouths of many citizens and residents generally - and has widen the distrust between the Police and the general public - which has eroded further the national security of The Bahamas.

To make matters horribly worse, a senior Officer of the Force - who occupied a high position of trust and responsibility - is accused of engaging in serious criminal activities with a high profile, highly and politically connected, potentially rogue and criminal-minded attorney, and street gangsters; some of whom have been murdered on the streets of Nassau in recent times. This has created a public scandal of monumental proportions.

The leadership of the Police Force along with the government of the day - seem to be taking the matter very lightly - in my opinion. Thus, the Bahamian community's view of the Police and the government - is one of complete disgrace. The handling of such a serious situation to date has left one to wonder if the powers that be have decided that they will gamble politically and just pretend that all's well.

Well, all is not well in The Bahamas under the political and immoral leadership of the status quo and its devoted facilitators. The Bahamian public feels as if endemic wholesale corruption, incompetence and criminality in high places throughout the Commonwealth of The Bahamas - is the order of the day which the shamelessly corrupt leadership of the nation holds so dearly close to their demonic hearts and souls.

The fruit of such diabolical corruption in high places will continue to rip apart the Bahamian nation. The wickedly corrupt political and otherwise leaders in The Bahamas do not care about the future welfare of their own friggin children! So, the future of The Bahamas will be more and more of the much sought after devilish corruption in high places - while powerful criminals and blood-thirsty bosses have their way with impunity!

How very sad - as many so called good Bahamian men and women remained silent! It looks like every Bahamian citizen are standing on the sidlines just watching The Bahamas descend in to the pits of hell.

New Hospital Location

Nassau, The Bahamas - The New National Hospital Site Debate

By Dennis Dames

I always deride the announcement of a new site for our national hospital by Bahamas government officials - when enough room is right next door to do the trick - in my opinion.

Yes, the space is right next door - on the late Mr. Collins property!  Sometimes I wonder if government executives wear googles when they come to power.

Use Mr. Collins land to build a few more units like the recently constructed and beautiful main entrance of Princess Margaret Hospital - PMH on Shirley Street!  Therefore, I call on The Bahamas government to consider this, and move to the next step to make the vision of a new Hospital possible.

It's simple as 1-2-3 mon.

The Lincoln Bain of division, hate and entertainment

Lincoln Bain coalition real political motives are division, hate and entertainment

By: 

John Brown

:

What have we here...

Response to Lincoln Bain response:

1. The is a moratorium on aragonite mining. Curling license is to mine SAND only. He never said that he was mining aragonite.

2. You claim that they are mining from ships. How come no one has ever spotted them. The entire Bahamas is covered by both satellite and radar. There is a record of every ship in our waters. Where is the evidence. Scroll over the arrows and click to see the names of the ships and detail information. https://www.marinetraffic.com/.../centetony:24.5/zoom:7

3. Marcona Ocean Industries is a company registered in Florida. Tony Myer name is not in the records.

4. A simple check with customs would confirm that customs, police and immigration were on the cay.

5. In Michelle Malcolm interview, you said that the Symonettes been mining aragonite for 40 years. Aragonite mining did not start until 1971. Pop Symonette and the UBP were long out of power. Dillingham was a US company listed on the NY Stock Exchange.

6. Tony Myers said that he sold everything. You said that he held on to the mining license. Still no proof.

7. Tony Myers has a company in Alabama but sand and aragonite can easily be sourced from the US wholesale market with less hassle than mining here.

8. The Aragonite Bill was specific to Ocean Cay which is just one location. That does not mean that no Bahamians could get involved in the business at that location or any other location.

9. So you know how to write bills better than the AG office.

10. Curling does not have an aragonite license. The witness said that they were involved in illegal operations well that doesn't count and should be investigated.

11. You do not seem capable of understanding that the processed value is not the same as the mining value. It does not matter what your aggregate is used for. You can only charge what it is worth in your possession which is $50 per ton.

12. Everyone involved in mining also is involved in the end product business also. The money is not in mining. Most just breakeven for the returns at the end. Therefore there is nothing wrong with owning companies in other countries.

13. The Central Bank reports show that he paid all his local taxes in full and on time. Taxes are paid on volume at extraction, not at export. You are very confused. See exhibit A

14. The witnesses testimony can not stand up in court. Completely circumstantial about ownership and value.

16. You do an audit first and then say corruption it is the other way around.

17. You admit to tapping Manny Alexio phone and should be arrested for that. You even threaten to do the same to those around you. What type of Pastor are you?

18. Everything that you have produced is totally irrelevant.

19. Your real motives are division, hate and entertainment.

20. All of your videos are circumstantial, hearsay and exaggerated.

source

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) is not a fascist party ...But there is a virulent fascist impulse that developed in tandem with the cult of personality ...around Sir Lynden

The fascist impulse in the PLP

By Simon
frontporchguardian@gmail.com

There is an entrenched conceit and pernicious lie which constitute the PLP’s claim of superior nationalism, most recently on peacock-like display over the past few weeks.

It is at minimum a sort of soft fascism which seeks to divide the country between the PLP, to whom God or history apparently bequeathed The Bahamas, and those supposed traitors who left or do not support the PLP or who fail to support its policies, or even oppose its wrong-doings.

There are various degrees of the conceit.  Within days of each other, three of the party faithful gave voice to the full throttled, high-pitched, chest-thumping “we are better than you” nationalism of which the PLP self-adoringly indulges.

Consider this: Nearing the 60th anniversary of the party’s founding, a PLP-leaning columnist suggests that the party is the more nationalistic of the two major parties even as he has written of his party’s abandonment or mere lip service of certain liberal and progressive values.

Then, a senior Cabinet minister concluded a press statement with a rallying cry to “true-blooded Bahamians”.  True-blooded is a synonym for full-blooded, which means, “of unmixed ancestry, purebred”, which invokes all manner of troubling overtones.

The most vile and repugnant claim came from junior minister Senator Keith Bell who attacked the FNM as treasonous and traitorous for comments the party and its leader made relative to the Cuban migrant affair.

Dr. Hubert Minnis has given considerable public service to the country as both a medical doctor and a politician.  For the sake of his own credibility and decency Bell should apologize to the leader of the opposition.

While Bell is hardly known for intellectual acuity, certainly even he must be aware that the charge of treason is one of the most serious that can be levelled at a citizen.  Treason carries with it the severest of punishments, even capital punishment.

Ludicrous

Bell’s claims are as ludicrous as they are malicious.  Significantly, he was not asked to withdraw or apologize for his comments by his political seniors.  But his words are not new for a PLP that has seen fit to wield malevolent tactics and rhetoric in attempts to beat opponents into submission.

In 1970 a delegation of PLPs travelled to Grand Bahama to apprise local party officials of their alarm at the direction the party was moving in terms of its abandonment of certain policies and the cult of personality mushrooming around an increasingly dictatorial Sir Lynden Pindling.

The delegation included Cecil Wallace Whitfield, Arthur A. Foulkes, Maurice Moore, Garnett Levarity and C. A. Smith, all veterans in the fight for majority rule.

The meeting was held in a school room at Lewis Yard, with a raised platform for the speakers and rows of folding chairs for attendees.  The meeting opened with a prayer.  Then all hell broke loose.

Having just invoked the Lord’s name, apparently in vain, a goon squad sprang from the front row.  They shouted that there would be no meeting.  Once on their feet they grabbed the chairs, folding them into bludgeons.

Then they viciously set upon their targets on the platform.  They drew blood from Sir Cecil, bashing him in his head, and bruising others.

While a few in the crowd sought to stop them, officers of the Royal Bahamas Police Force looked on.  They refused to intervene.

What is little known of the Lewis Yard event is that Sir Cecil suspected that something might happen.  His instructions to members of the delegation were to keep their hands at their sides if they were attacked.

His reasons were both practical and philosophical.  By refusing to return the blows, the delegates were demonstrating a commitment to the nonviolent tactics of the U.S. civil rights movement.  Further, there would be no doubt as to the perpetrators of the violence.

On the way out of Lewis Yard, a close associate of Sir Lynden, who would later resign from the former’s Cabinet in disgrace, was observed in a trench coat, standing in the rain.

The scene foreshadowed events to come, including decades of intimidation, victimization, abuse of power and corruption by the Pindling regime.

It does not require of a leap of conscience or imagination to characterize what happened at Lewis Yard and the fascist impulse behind it.

At Lewis Yard, Bahamian citizens, including three members of Parliament, were denied fundamental and constitutional rights including that of assembly and of freedom of speech.  They were denied the protection of the state as a mob attacked and police officials stood by watching the beatings.

There is certainly no democratic impulse at play here.  The democratic impulse is not frightened by the sort of dissidence exemplified by those at Lewis Yard, who had a difference of opinion as to the direction their party and the country should take.

At the time, one of the highest-ranking PLP ministers sought to diminish what took place at Lewis Yard, noting that such incidents were to be expected in Bahamian politics.

To ensure that those who disagreed with Sir Lynden and his court got the message intended at Lewis Yard, PLP MP Henry Bowen went on ZNS to denounce the dissidents as traitors.

Just to recall, he was denouncing fellow-PLPs who were considered as not only betraying the PLP.  By calling into question Sir Lynden’s leadership they were supposedly also betraying the nation.

The charges were replayed on state radio in a barrage and loop of intimidation. Those attacked were allowed no right of reply.  Over the ensuing decades the PLP relentlessly utilized ZNS as a major propaganda tool.

Monopoly

Even more diabolical, it kept a monopoly on the broadcast media.  In the modern era autocratic and dictatorial regimes understood that the maintenance of political power demanded as much control of the media as possible.  It is a fascist impulse to allow only one party line to be heard on state media.

Today still, many in the PLP firmly hold that those who may disagree with them are somehow traitorous and treasonous, even when they oppose wrong-doing in the party as did the Dissident Eight in 1970 and Hubert Ingraham and Perry Christie in 1984.

The PLP is not a fascist party.  But there is a virulent fascist impulse that developed in tandem with the cult of personality around Sir Lynden.

Unlike the biblical Moses, Pindling, the Bahamian Moses, was set to enter the Promised Land.  Thereafter the apotheosis of Sir Lynden, seen by many PLPs as an icon of the nation, whose very persona supposedly embodied the nation, was underway.

The fascist impulse has so invariably developed in parties of liberation and majority rule-cum independence, which almost as an original sin tend to equate the good of their organization and needs with that of a country.

To wit: What is good for the PLP is good for the country.  And, the most full-blooded and patriotic Bahamians must be PLP or vote for the party.  It is no accident that the PLP chose similar colors for both the national flag and their party flag.

Even as the PLP betrayed the national good whether through wrecking what promised to be a successful national airline or giving drug barons near carte blanche to ply their trade, the party betrayed many of its founding ideals.

Yet it continued, often quite successfully, to play the politics of nationalism and to demonize many who had a different vision of the national good and a more inclusive vision of a shared nationalism and common good.

September 12, 2013

thenassauguardian

Philip Galanis on the Progressive Liberal Party’s (PLP) 60th anniversary - (Part - 1)

A response to Philip Galanis on ‘The PLP at 60’, pt. 1

By Kirkland Turner

Philip Galanis picked the wrong day to publish his piece on the Progressive Liberal Party’s 60th anniversary.  Its publication in The Nassau Guardian coincided with the publication of Rupert Missick Jr.’s thoughtful article in The Tribune entitled “The Cuban Detainees and the Long Awaited Revolution”.

Galanis’ piece regurgitated the PLP propaganda line that “God gave The Bahamas to the PLP”.  These words were actually spoken on the floor of the House of Assembly by a former member – a minister no less – and stand as stunning testimony to the frightening culture of entitlement and exceptionalism that has long corrupted the PLP.

It is a sickness with multiple delusional aspects that leads them, for example, to believe that rules which apply to other people do not apply to them, that ‘taking care’ of PLP cronies at the public’s expense is alright, that nobody loves their country as well as they do, that victimization of their opponents is justifiable, and that branding fellow citizens as traitors is also justifiable.

It also accounts for the persistent lie perpetrated against the FNM that that party was against independence when, in fact, the leaders of the FNM were passionate advocates of independence but were convinced that Sir Lynden Pindling was not the right person to lead an independent Bahamas.  The Bahamian electorate thought otherwise and elected him and the PLP.

The FNM came to this conclusion for a number of reasons including the fact that while they were still members of the PLP they were beaten up in broad daylight by PLP goons who were ordered not to allow them to speak at a meeting in Lewis Yard.   Their judgment that Sir Lynden was not the right person to lead an independent Bahamas was vindicated by events, some of which I shall refer to here.

A nationalist party?

In his column Galanis describes the PLP as “The Bahamas’ first and some would argue only nationalist party”.  The most recent reference to the PLP and nationalists was by its current leader, Perry Christie, who termed his party a “black nationalist party”.  He has not chosen to so describe his party since its re-election as government last year.

Perhaps that would be offensive to one of his Cabinet ministers and to the many wealthy white local and international sponsors whom he and his party so ardently court, in some cases with generous gifts of Bahamian land and other special considerations.

The dictionary offers a number of views on the term nationalist, ranging from the simple “an ideology which is pro-independence, pro self-rule or pro-separatist” to a more complex “an ideology that creates and sustains a nation as a concept of a common identity for groups of humans”.  Nationalism, it is said, “seeks the preservation of identity, features and promotes the well-being, and the glory of one’s own fundamental values”.

While the PLP can justify itself as a political party that sought and achieved political independence for The Bahamas, the jury is certainly still out on whether its policies in government have served to create a common identity for the groups of humans living in The Bahamas and entitled to citizenship on July 10, 1973.  Many would assert just the opposite.

Still others might claim that PLP policies facilitated the infiltration of a violent drug culture into our country in the late 1970s and early 1980s, contributing to the destruction of traditional family and social values, branding The Bahamas internationally as a “nation for sale”, and compromising the government which suffered the humiliation of being disparaged and criticized in the international community.

Two PLP Cabinet ministers were forced to resign their posts in the face of serious allegations of corruption, and then two other Cabinet ministers were fired because of their stance against corruption in high places.  The government suffered a final humiliation when the serving Deputy Prime Minister and Deputy Leader of the Party A.D. Hanna resigned his posts not wishing to be aligned with so compromised a government.  Surely this was not leadership by nationalists interested in promoting the well-being and the glory of our fundamental values.

As The Bahamas’ reputation suffered, the government’s pronouncements about our sovereign independence and our nationalism became more strident, even shrill.  There are echoes of this in recent hysterical charges of “siding with the enemy” and “treason” belching from members of the present Cabinet.

Missick’s article goes straight to the heart of the matter.  Speaking of aspiring revolutionaries who missed the “first revolution”, Missick suggests that some in this generation of imitator revolutionaries are satisfied to mouth “frothing, hyperbolic defense of nationhood and national identity” when in fact their noise is of a “generation desperate to fight a revolution, only it’s not the one that is actually theirs to fight”.

The sad reality is that when The Bahamas joined the international campaign against the illicit drug trade it was not from a position of principle or even one of strength but rather from a position of weakness, the PLP government and its leaders were so compromised as to be forced to accept the dictates of the world community.

Some may argue that The Bahamas’ agreement to “Hot Pursuit” and “Ship Rider” anti-drug trafficking arrangements agreed with the United States of America by the Pindling administration was the first surrender of Bahamian sovereignty.  While positive developments, it is a sad reality that they were entered into by a compromised government anxious to demonstrate, even though late, a willingness to join the international anti-illicit drug war.

Similarly, a compromised Bahamas government was forced to negotiate and conclude the terms of the lease of the AUTEC Base in Andros from a less than ideal position.

Throughout the decade of the 1980s The Bahamas had only one profile internationally – drugs.  It would take the election of the FNM to government in 1992 before The Bahamas could become a respected voice in the international community on a host of issues important to wider Bahamian national interests and national aspirations: protecting the environment, drawing international attention to the human, political and economic crisis in Haiti, achieving the Millennium Development Goals and campaigning to address and contain the epidemic of non-communicable diseases afflicting and killing too many in our population.

Strayed from founding principles

As to the bona fides of the PLP as a nationalist party, an objective look at the history of the PLP reveals that it was created by mixed race men, mostly out of Long Island.  These men, but particularly Henry Taylor, had studied the formation and organization of political parties in the United Kingdom.

In writing the constitution for their new political party the founders adopted what they believed to be tried and tested rules and regulations for political parties including, for example, a requirement that the party meet in convention annually. As a result of the diligence of its founders the PLP had without a doubt one of the best institutional frameworks for political association in a modern democracy.

The past 60 years, regrettably, has demonstrated that a constitution creating a strong political party framework is not enough.  In fact, it has proved inadequate to ensure that those who came to lead the party in government would be progressive or liberal.  And, it proved, sadly, that the party’s name and constitution were inadequate to keep the party’s leadership transparent, accountable or dedicated to good governance.

Galanis should not be surprised that the PLP decided to jettison their constitutional requirement to meet in convention annually.  The PLP has often enough jettisoned its principles – particularly when principle interfered with self-aggrandizement, personal advantage and privilege.

Galanis makes a plea for his party to remain progressive and liberal ignoring the fact that those labels are anathema to a party whose primary interest is securing place and position for a selected few connected individuals.

Party history vs. the record

Galanis was careful to list the development of virtually every national institution during the 25-year leadership of Lynden Pindling as PLP accomplishments without acknowledging that these were quite simply the basic requirements of nationhood.

To call one’s country an independent nation and to seek to interact with other nations on the world stage without establishing a central bank, a defence force, a national social security scheme and a tertiary level learning institution would be to contradict the meaning of nationhood.

Galanis, in a glib piece unworthy of the training he received as a chartered accountant and once aspiring leader in one of the most prestigious international public accounting firms, seeks to erase from the national memory the terrible damage to this country caused by visionless, self-interested and corrupt leadership in the PLP.

In a contrived sentence which may or may not actually admit to the official corruption that sullied The Bahamas’ reputation internationally throughout the 1980s and which fatally wounded the legacy of the first prime minister of an independent Bahamas, Galanis said that the Pindling era came to an abrupt end in August 1992 when the PLP government was defeated by the FNM led by Hubert Ingraham.

Democracy stifled in the PLP

Galanis chose to ignore a history that records that following political victory in 1967 but before independence in 1973, the dictatorial self-interested obsessed leadership of the PLP had long dispatched the founders of the party.  Perhaps they were inconveniently neither black enough nor educationally refined enough for the young black barrister who wrested control of the party soon after its founding.

By 1965 two free-thinkers among that British-trained lawyer group – Paul Adderley and Orville Turnquest, together with U.S.-trained engineer Holland Smith and businessman Spurgeon Bethel – made their exit from the PLP already concerned that they could never influence or change their party’s leadership.  Adderley would return to the PLP, married to the “ideal that could have been” and incapable of aligning himself with others who had made the difficult decision to stay the course in a new party committed to true democracy.

By October 1971 the Dissident Eight – Cecil Wallace Whitfield, Arthur Foulkes, Warren J. Levarity, Maurice Moore, Dr. Curtis McMillan, James (Jimmy) Shepherd, Dr. Elwood Donaldson and George Thompson – also exited the PLP.  Given the political environment of the time, their departure from the PLP meant almost certain political death.  Most would never see the inside of the House of Assembly as sitting members again.

They left nonetheless because the dictatorial traits they saw growing in their charismatic leader and the personality cult being nurtured around him troubled them to the core of their democratic souls. Cecil Wallace Whitfield famously echoed the U.S. civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. in his address to the PLP convention during which he announced his resignation from the party proclaiming: “Free at last!  Free at Last! My soul is dancing!”

With much of the democratic soul of the PLP having been forced out, the PLP led the country into independence with one of the most conservative (read least progressive or liberal) constitutions agreed for any former British colony in the Caribbean.

The “progressive and liberal” PLP delegation to the Independence Conference rejected an opposition proposal to give Bahamian women full equality and opposed it again in 2002 when the FNM government attempted to correct it.  Also, no other Caribbean constitution is so encumbered by requirements for referenda to amend entrenched clauses.

September 06, 2013

thenassauguardian

Philip Galanis on the Progressive Liberal Party’s (PLP) 60th anniversary - (Part - 2)>>>

Flip-floppers and double talk in Bahamian Politics

Double talk

An up close look at duplicity and hypocrisy in nat’l politics

BY CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com

The political landscape is forever changing and with it comes shifting political positions.

For some politicians, their views on issues of national import evolve due to certain developments that cast new light on these matters.  In some circumstances, this is quite understandable.

But for others, their positions shift based on political expediency and opportunity.

These are the flip-floppers, the hypocrites, the duplicitous bunch who may be stunned perhaps if confronted with past statements lined up against current views.

Very rarely do their words come back to haunt them; not because the evidence of their duplicity is not there, but because it often remains buried on the dusty pages of newspapers that are clipped and stored away.

These politicians depend on the short memories of the electorate, perhaps, or the failure of media to do a better job at making them accountable for their utterances and actions.

The examples of double talk stretch back years, and really take little digging to be exposed, especially in the technological age.

In opposition, some politicians latch on to pet issues — crime, the environment, education and others.  But in government, they sometimes lose whatever ‘passion’ they might have had for these issues.

To be clear, the flip-floppers are not unique to any one party or philosophical grouping.  They are on every side. They use words to score points, assuage fears and grab headlines.

Often, they change positions based on what side of the political aisle they may be on at the time.  In opposition, a politician’s view on a subject may differ entirely from the view he or she might express in government.

The archives of The Nassau Guardian reveal more than enough flip-flopping, duplicity and hypocrisy to write many weeks of articles.

Consider these few examples:

Dr. Bernard Nottage on the Coroner’s Court

In opposition, Dr. Nottage was a passionate advocate for crime victims and strong in his concerns about alleged police abuse.

He seemed to have little trust in the Corner’s Court or in the police to investigate themselves.

But as national security minister, his tone is different.

After two men died in police custody just over a week ago, Dr. Nottage cautioned the public against making assumptions until all the facts are known.

“I can’t rush to judgment,” he told reporters.  “I hold the commissioner of police directly responsible for the conduct of his officers.  He knows that, he reports to me regularly and my experience thus far has been where justifiable complaints have been made against police officers, the commissioner has been resolute in pursuing the matter to its lawful conviction.”

Further expressing confidence in the police and the coroner to do their job, Dr. Nottage said, “It is my view that even without the coroner’s involvement if the matter could be investigated by police that a thorough job would be done.

“But I don’t think that would satisfy the public and so that is why the coroner, who is an independent institution, is very important in this matter.”

In September 2012, after The Nassau Guardian reported on several fatal police shootings, Nottage said criminals cannot expect to brandish weapons at police without facing consequences.

In December 2010, he was not a minister.  Back then he expressed little faith in the police and in the Coroner’s Court.

On December 1, 2010, he called for an independent public inquiry into the death of Shamarco Newbold, a 19-year-old who was killed by police.

“It is not good enough to refer it to the Coroner’s Court, Mr. Speaker,” Nottage said in the House of Assembly.

“Neither is it good enough for there to be an internal inquiry on the part of the police.”

These days, it is good enough as far as Nottage is concerned.

As an aside, Nottage has yet to use his position of power to push for ‘Marco’s Law’ or the establishment of a sex offenders’ register, things he called for while in opposition, after the murder of 11-year-old Marco Archer in September 2011.

“I believe that out of this sad event will come new policies and perhaps even new legislation... possibly a Marco's Law.  I shall push for that," he vowed back then.

The legislation would seek to strengthen the penalties associated with child molestation, he said.

Perhaps Dr. Nottage will use his weight before the end of this term to push for the things he called for in opposition.

Darron Cash and BTC

Free National Movement (FNM) Chairman Darron Cash has more than one example of being a flip-flopper, but for the purpose of this piece, I will focus on just one.

After Prime Minister Perry Christie told reporters last week that the government is considering appointing a select committee to examine the controversial 2011 sale of 51 percent of the shares of The Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC), Cash lashed out in a statement.

He said, “The suggestion that [Christie] wants a probe of the BTC sale to Cable and Wireless first evokes disbelief, then laughter and pity”.

Cash then urged the government to “bring it on”.

He said probing BTC would be a “meaningless journey” that would waste taxpayer dollars.

Cash also accused Christie of trying to deflect attention away from his “nine months of colossal failure and ineptitude”.

And he said the prime minister was attempting to tarnish the legacy of former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.

Stunning words from a man who was so critical of the BTC deal back in 2011 that he wrote a lengthy article on why the deal was a bad one.

In fact, Cash himself urged then Prime Minister Ingraham to “take the Cable and Wireless/LIME deal back to the drawing board and design a better deal”.

Cash wrote, “I disagree with the government’s proposed action.  I believe it is wrong for the country, this decision to sell the country short.

“It is a betrayal of future generations, and like a bad stock on BISX — in which you have little confidence — the government is selling the next generation (my generation) short.”

In that piece, Cash seemed to have suggested that the deal would have reflected poorly on Ingraham’s legacy.  His tone has changed.

How could Darron Cash expect anyone to take him seriously?

If it is the FNM’s position that Christie’s contemplation of a probe is laughable or evokes pity, Cash should have been the last person to say so.

His position on the BTC deal was clear at the time he stated it.

Defending himself yesterday, Cash said, “As to my personal position regarding the sale of BTC, let me make one thing abundantly clear to the chairman of the PLP; my position on the sale of BTC has absolutely nothing to do with whether the present government should waste public money on a meaningless inquiry into that sale.”

The mid-year budget statement

This week, the Christie administration will present its mid-year budget statement, revealing adjustments in spending and providing a progress report on the state of public finances and the economy.

The practice of presenting the statement was instituted by the Ingraham administration, and every year during the debate that followed, the PLP’s position was that it was a waste of time.

In a statement on February 23, 2011, the PLP said the mid-year budget was “a waste of time, a public relations sham like so much of what this government does by sleight of hand”.

It was the message of the PLP during each debate of the mid-year budget under Ingraham.

For example, during debate in the Senate on March 16, 2009, then Senator Allyson Maynard-Gibson repeated what her colleagues had to say in the House.

“The mid-year budget review is a waste of time, staff resources and money,” she opined.  “The information in this mid-year budget could have been given in a one man press conference.”

A few days earlier, then Minister of State for Immigration Branville McCartney defended the Ingraham administration for bringing the mid-year budget.

“Our country should be forever grateful to our visionary prime minister, the Rt. Hon. Hubert A. Ingraham, for having the fore thought to introduce this concept of a mid-year budget report to Parliament,” McCartney said.

“…This exercise is critical towards our government’s effort to encourage and promote accountability, transparency, best financial practices and proper budget planning”.

This year, the mid-year budget statement will apparently not be a waste of time because the PLP is bringing it.

Such is politics I suppose.

Unemployment numbers

The Department of Statistics recently released new unemployment numbers that show the unemployment rate in The Bahamas decreased slightly from 14.7 percent to 14 percent.

The latest survey was conducted from October 29 to November 4, 2012.  It showed that 165,255 were listed as employed and 26,950 were listed as unemployed.

The governing party welcomed the news, saying it is evidence that Christie and his team are moving the economy in the right direction.

While it was only a slight decrease, Minister of State for Finance Michael Halkitis said it was good news nonetheless.

But unlike August 2011, the PLP had no concerns that the Department of Statistics did not count discouraged workers — that group of people who are willing to work but who have become so discouraged they have given up looking for work.

Back then when the department released numbers showing that the rate had dropped from 14.2 percent to 13.7 percent, the PLP criticized statisticians who had conducted the survey.

In fact, the party staged a demonstration. That’s right, a demonstration, placards and all.

During that protest, Elizabeth MP Ryan Pinder said unless discouraged workers are added to the unemployment figure, the overall statistics are “misleading”.

At the same protest, Halkitis said the Ingraham administration was excluding those numbers in an effort to show that the economy is turning around.

Why is no one in the PLP demanding that discouraged workers be included in the latest calculation of the unemployment rate?  Could it be because they are now in power?

At the time of that 2011 protest, Director of the Department of Statistics Kelsie Dorsett fired back, saying both the PLP and the FNM too often use the statistics to gain political points.

“Both the Free National Movement and the Progressive Liberal Party have short-term memories when it comes to how the process works,” Dorsett told The Guardian.

With politicians flip-flopping on so many issues like unemployment numbers, it is likely that the electorate will become even more suspicious, jaded, skeptical and untrusting of politicians.

After all, nobody loves a hypocrite.

February 18, 2013

thenassauguardian

Urban Renewal 2.0 is bigger than politics ...and for it to work effectively it has to be “above politics” ... says Prime Minister Perry Christie

Renewal 'Bigger Than Politics'

 

By DENISE MAYCOCK
Tribune Freeport  Reporter
dmaycock@tribunemedia.net

FREEPORT - Prime Minister Perry Christie says Urban Renewal 2.0 is bigger than politics and for it to work effectively it has to be “above politics”.

“Our politics must always take second place to the essential issue of moving The Bahamas forward,” Mr Christie said on Wednesday at the official launch of the programme in Grand Bahama at the Hilton Outten Convention Centre.

 Deputy Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis, and other cabinet ministers, including National Security Minister Dr Bernard Nottage, Minister of Transport and Aviation Glenys Hanna-Martin, and Labour Minister Shane Gibson were also present.

Mr Christie expressed his complete confidence in the appointment of Algernon Allen, former FNM Cabinet minister, and Cynthia “Mother” Pratt, former PLP Deputy Prime Minister, to head the Urban Renewal commission.

He said both are distinguished Bahamians who have a feel for people and who have the capacity to rise above politics.

“As Prime Minister, I have to call on the all the people regardless of their politics.  The MPs in Grand Bahama all of them should understand that it is bigger than them.  

“We are all in transition and this is about establishing a culture in this country where young men know that if they walk into somebody’s house and rape or try to rape, they will be caught and they will be severely punished.

“This is the reason why in our selection for the leaders of the Urban Renewal commission, we chose two distinguish Bahamians – Algernon Allen, a former minister in the FNM government, is that he has demonstrated in a public capacity a feel for people, and young people in this country.

“And co-leader, Cynthia Pratt, who served as DPM, brings to this mission an incredible feel for people and one, who I think, like Algernon, has the capacity to rise above politics.”

In his remarks, Mr Allen said he comes “as a spiritual son of Sir Cecil Wallace-Whitfield, but also a philosophical brother of Prime Minister Perry Christie.”

He said that Urban Renewal is about changing lives – transforming a home, a street, and a community and uplifting those in need.

“This will be above politics.  We send a clarion call to all to join us,” Mr Allen said.

July 19, 2012

Tribune242

Loretta Butler-Turner is now the closest woman to the highest seat of power in the nation... ...In Mrs Butler-Turner's favour, all around the world, women are assuming power... and that energy will have a powerful pull just the same... ...Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar in Trinidad and Tobago... Prime Minister Portia Simpson-Miller in Jamaica... Maybe President Hillary Clinton (USA) in 2016... and maybe Prime Minister Loretta Butler-Turner for The Bahamas in 2017

Loretta Butler-Turner For 2017?

TALKING SENSE

By KHALILA NICOLLS

EVER since May 7 when the mighty Free National Movement (FNM) came tumbling down, the name Hubert Minnis, former Minister of Health, has been floated as the inevitable next leader of the Free National Movement (FNM).

The final tally left the FNM with only three members of parliament with parliamentary experience: the dinosaur Edison Key, who, safe to say, health challenges aside, has no shot at leadership, and probably no desire; Dr Minnis and Loretta Butler-Turner, former Minister of Social Services.

Mrs Butler-Turner is the underdog in the two-way race with Dr Minnis, but only because this is the political arena, where gender dynamics work against her.  But I think the FNM, which is badly in need of repositioning, would be foolish to overlook her as a strong, if not the strongest, leadership option for the party.

Based on Mrs Butler-Turner's size and statue, her strong back and her sharp mouth, I think she could eat Dr Minnis for lunch in a competition for the strongest opposition leader in the House of Assembly.

I am not always a fan of Mrs Butler-Turner as far as conduct in parliament is concerned; she too is a part of a boorish culture that has come to define all of our parliamentarians, but I do see her as a stronger leader for the lean FNM flock, who will stand against the 29-member strong government majority.

Nonetheless, last night, the FNM confirmed the talk and announced Dr Minnis as leader of the opposition.  It was predictable, but I only hope it does not reflect the party's dismissal of Mrs Butler-Turner.

No doubt, when the convention comes around, probably in June, the party will nominate and elect Dr Minnis as leader and Mrs Butler-Turner as deputy leader.  She would be a unwise not to have higher ambitions, but she would also be a unwise to contest Dr Minnis at this time.  Timing is everything, and five years is a long time.  Both Dr Minnis and Mrs Butler-Turner will have ample time to prove their salt.

This is not to undermine Dr Minnis, who is a hugely popular figure in his constituency, and a relatively popular Minister of Health, with the ability to lead.  However, the people's mandate for the FNM to get rid of the dinosaurs and the old dynasties was so dramatic that an equally bold shift in the party's outlook and approach would position it the best.

Tommy Turnquest, Dion Foulkes, Charles Maynard, Carl Bethel, Zhivargo Laing and Desmond Bannister were all rejected by voters.  Within this cohort of losers was the assumed next leader, which is why the FNM is now in its leadership quandary.

The blow must be the most bitter for Mr Turnquest and Mr Foulkes, who descend from the founding fathers of the party and have spent most of their lives trying to live up to their families' legacies.

On the sunnyside up, however, the Bahamian voter did for the FNM what its stalwart counsellors could and would never do: clean house and go against conventional wisdom.  It is a golden opportunity for the reorganisation of the party, for new faces to shine.  Sort of like the opportunity Branville McCartney was looking for when he was in the FNM.

Dr Minnis ran an extremely effective ground campaign, probably the best in the FNM.  It is a wonder why no one followed his lead.  Prior to the election, I understand, he had leadership ambition, but he understood the competition: men who were not only anointed, but had a breadth of experience in the public service, which is something a prime minister ideally should have.

Mr Turnquest had been a minister of national security, works and tourism.  Mr Foulkes had been a minister of youth, sports and culture and a minister of labour.  Mr Laing had been the minister of state for finance.

Dr Minnis, being somewhat of an academic and analytical man according to insiders, wanted to leave the Ministry of Health where he had accomplished so much, according to sources.  Dr Minnis entered politics with the skill set for health, and did not want to be pigeon holed.  In the Ministry of Health, he was not really tested.

He wanted to stretch his wings, broaden his base by taking on the challenge of another ministry, so when time came, he would have all of his credentials and recommendations lined up.  Sounds like smart politics, so the fact that the party's leadership dropped in his lap was ahead of schedule, but in a sense right on time.

But here is where Mrs Butler-Turner trumps Dr Minnis.   When the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) was in its early days, some observers say, it was former attorney general A D Hanna who was really the brains behind the operation, while Sir Lynden Pindling was the face.

Mr Hanna was the kingmaker but never the king.  This is the difference between Mrs Butler-Turner and Dr Minnis in terms of their political strengths.

Dr Minnis is a well-organised man, but he is as mundane as he is organised.  He does not evoke strong passions in people although he evokes confidence.  What Mr Ingraham and Mr Christie have in common is that they are either loved or hated.  Mr Ingraham's in the end was trumped by those who hated him.

Dr Minnis is a neutral figure, and politicians of this kind do not make strong leaders, because they have a hard time garnering followers.

Mrs Butler-Turner on the other hand, is an effective speaker and has a strong presence.  She has the capacity to build a following, even though she has polarising qualities.

Before the election, I had predicted that the FNM would win big or lose big, for one simple reason.  It was clear that key FNM MPs were given one mandate: deliver two seats (the one where they served in the last government, and the one where they were running on May 7).  If they had, the FNM could have swept the election.  FNM insiders had predicted 28 red seats, when in fact the FNM lost 28 and more.

Zhivargo Laing was one of the earliest cabinet ministers to fall, and with that the FNM virtually lost two seats.  Sure enough, by the end of the night, Marco City, Mr Laing's old seat, had fallen.  When Sydney Collie lost to V. Alfred Gray in MICAL that sealed the deal (if there was any doubt) about Leslie Miller's (PLP) chances in Tall Pines, Mr Collie's former Bluehill constituency.

The only FNM who delivered on the two-seat strategy was Loretta Butler-Turner, who despite the claims that she was ousted from Montagu in unpopularity, delivered Richard Lightbourne to the House in a heated contest against the PLP's Frank Smith.  The FNM lost big because they gambled wrong with their two-seat strategy on everyone except Loretta.  (Of course they underestimated the impact of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) and had other challenges).

Montagu is usually assumed to be a secure seat for the FNM; however, given the climate, no seat was safe.  It was not a surety that Mr Lightbourne would win, especially not against Mr Smith.  And whereas Mrs Butler-Turner won by some 1,300 votes in the last election, Mr Lightbourne only won by a few hundred.

So give credit where credit is due.  Mr Lightbourne of course, did his job, but he inherited Mrs Butler-Turner's Montagu team; friends and family in her childhood knocking ground, based on the boundary cuts; and her reputation, which while damaged was still intact.  But more importantly, Mrs Butler-Turner also won her Long Island seat.

What is interesting is that while the dynasties fell, Hubert Ingraham's two buddies held firm. Mr Ingraham was said to have a strong relationship with Dr Minnis and to be the biggest backer of Mrs Butler-Turner.

In fact, some say Mr Ingraham is a feminist at heart.  However, given the FNM's defeat, and Mr Ingraham's departure, many stalwart counsellors, who may have felt bound to the will of Mr Ingraham before, will now feel free.

Sources claim some FNM insiders resented how much say Mrs Butler-Turner had, asking Ingraham at times to muzzle her.  They wondered why he would not put her in her place or shut her up.  This came to a head with the proposed amendment to the Sexual Offences Act that was not popular amongst FNM MPs. Even Cabinet support was questionable.

On this particular issue, Mrs Butler-Turner has the female advantage.  There is an old Jamaican saying, "tie the heifer, release the bull."  However, in a political pen with many bulls the opposite would seem to make more sense, "tie the (other) bulls and release the heifer."  Mrs Butler-Turner has never had to live in the shadow of "Papa" Ingraham, which cannot be said for any other male MP in the party.

With two bulls in a pen, there is by nature a competitive and antagonistic energy that subordinates the weaker of the two.  Gender dynamics between men and women are different.  Even where a woman may be more dominant, she will not likely be perceived as a threat for a man who is strong in his own character.

Loretta Butler-Turner is now the closest woman to the highest seat of power in the nation, notwithstanding Cynthia Pratt, who was acting prime minister.  It is a heavy weight to shoulder, but I have no doubt Mrs Butler-Turner is capable of rising to the occasion.

The heartening part is that Mrs Butler-Turner is not just an MP in a skirt.  She actually stands for women's rights.  Let us hope she stays that way.  Let us hope she does not turn into a partisan hack.  Let us hope she puts principle before party, and people before self as a leader.  Let us hope she takes wise counsel.  Let us hope she brings substantive contributions to parliamentary debate, not just partisan reflections or lamentations about the good old days of "papa."

People who oppose Mrs Butler-Turner sometimes say she is short-tempered and elitist.  If the former is true, she will certainly need to learn to temper her spirit.  As far as being a snob, there are managable things she can do to change that perception.  So she should get to it.

What I think a large part of the opposition boils down too, however, is that Mrs Butler-Turner is an outspoken woman with strong opinions, who does not easily back down. Opponents in and out of the party must hate that, especially when her ideas do not gel with their own.

As she jostles for a shot at leadership, no doubt women will be her harshest and most vocal critics.  For them, her physical size, will probably be the most intimidating.  I urge them to be honest and fair critics and not crab-in-the-barrel "haters."

In the past few years, governments have toppled all around the world.  The FNM was swept up in that powerful force.

In Mrs Butler-Turner's favour, all around the world, women are assuming power: and that energy will have a powerful pull just the same.  Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar in Trinidad and Tobago.  Prime Minister Portia Simpson-Miller in Jamaica.  Maybe President Hillary Clinton (USA) in 2016, and maybe Prime Minister Loretta Butler-Turner for the Bahamas in 2017.

It will be interesting to see how everything pans out.

Follow on Twitter @noelle_elleon or email khalilanicolls@gmail.com

May 10, 2012

tribune242