Reflections on 49 Years of Bahamas Independence

Bahamian Independence: Where is the Strategical Empowerment of the Average Bahamian?

BAHAMIANS - TO BE INDEPENDENT OR NOT INDEPENDENT, THAT IS THE QUESTION?

By Dr Kevin Joseph Turnquest Alcena

LLB (Hon-1st Cl.), LLM (Hon-1st cl.) Ph.D. in Economics/Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology/Ph.D. in Public Health/Ph.D. in Herbal and Holistic Medicine/Ph.D. in Biogenetics/M.D. Titular Professor, Lawyer July 9 9 2022

As we here in The Bahamas stand on the precipice of celebrating forty-nine (49) years as an “independent” nation, I ponder on the idea of whether we have indeed attained real freedom. What then does it mean to be independent? What have we really achieved in pursuit of liberty? What have we gained in our ambitious attempt to climb the ladder to sovereignty?

Well, according to Maria Montessori, “Independence is not a static condition; it is a continuous conquest, and in order to reach not only freedom, but also strength, and the perfecting on one’s powers, it is necessary to follow this path of unremitting toil.”

Have we understood the conditions necessary to thrive as an independent nation? Or have we deceived ourselves into thinking that we have prospered in this capacity?

If we were to be honest with ourselves, have we carried out the mandate that was left behind by our forefathers to ensure that we are ‘one people united in love and service?’ Can we look through the dispensations of time and say that we have done all that we can as Bahamians to ensure that we are leaving this nation as an inheritance for our future generations?

Proverbs 13:22 says, “A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children…”

Have we done justice to that which was left behind by those that went before us, or have we carelessly squandered the resources and ignored their pleas of guaranteeing the next generation is taken care of?

Let us review what has been done over the past forty-nine (49) years.

Firstly, can we call a ten-billion debt advancement? Over the years to free ourselves from the bars of being dependent on other countries we have accumulated an astounding amount of debt that has left us I daresay, more bound than ever!

We see no improvement in terms of debt management. We have regressed as we have made ourselves slaves in our own country to China, the United States, Europe, even our neighboring Caribbean countries.

John Adams said it best, “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a country. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.”

How can we say we are truly free when we depend on everyone to feed us, keep our economy running, keep our cars on the road, our environment secured, even our borders safe? How are we uninhibited when we do not see a need to break free from the chains of our self-created bondage?

We have become so complacent in being slaves that we fight to stay enshrouded in the safety net of captivity rather than war for true liberty. We have simply traded on task master for another.

We have trained each other, like the Pavlovian Model of Consumer Behavior to answer the call of the slave masters of our nation. This conditioning has matriculated down through the ages to the detriment of our children and their children’s children.

As a result, we have constructed a society of entitled, unmotivated and unproductive people who do not even comprehend the fact that they are in subjugation to a society that they will never be released from.

Most people are only living from pay cheque to pay cheque. Therefore, so many struggle to survive when it is time to retire because of the debt that has been accumulated over time. We have been conditioned by our leaders to borrow and borrow to the inconveniency of eternal servitude that our generational line must suffer through.

So instead of inheriting lands and wealth, we inherit debt upon debt. As Proverbs 22:7 declares, “The borrower is slave to the lender.” Can we in fact say that we have succeeded in our goal of being free?

Secondly, do you think it was the objective of our predecessors on their march to freedom to create a government that spends more time warring, rather than working with each other? “Party disputes are now carried to such a length, and truth is so enveloped in mist and false representation, that is extremely difficult to know through what channel to seek it out” (George Washington).

Successive governments - one after the other, continue the trend of the very thing our progenitors tried to escape that being partisanship in our political ideology.

How can an overcrowded Civil Service be called evolvement? The Bahamas is so far behind in terms of growth and development as opposed to our counterparts in the U.S., Canada, Africa, and the Caribbean. Why?

For one thing we cannot seem to grasp the concept of promotion based on training and skill rather than seniority.

Where then, is the strategical empowerment of the average Bahamian?

There is a consistent cry that the government has no money to hire. Yet we see the same people that have recently retired back in the public eye, paid thousands of dollars to ‘work’ on contract, while everyone beneath them carries out the labor. How can we say we are independent when even in the workplace, we do not believe in succession planning or giving others the chance to excel?

There is a persistent complaint by the powers that be, about the lack of trained young people, but when they become qualified, they are told there are no opportunities for them! But we wonder why when they go off to school, they have no desire to come back home.

The solution here is simple, let those that are retired, stay home and open doors for more opportunities for those that are qualified through incentivized programs so that they can come back home.

Moreover, when persons make the bold move to try and elevate themselves, they are met with all kinds of hinderances. The idea that they would have the audacity to step out of line and out of their place, reemphasizes the oppression we have been born into.

Galatians 5:13 states, “For brethren you have been called unto liberty: only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.” According to our constitution, we consider ourselves to be a Christian nation. If that be the case, why do we despise our own and not as the word says, serve one another?

Why do we instead continue to choose others over our own and exploit one other to please the slave masters we have inherited? Why do not help one another excel and elevate, rather than tear each other down? Why do we continue to keep the masses down and impoverished, rather than empowered? I ask you my brothers and sisters, is this what independence really means?

Ervin Welsh said, “It is important to know we can celebrate independence, but more so to ensure we are not living in-dependence.” How powerful is it when we comprehend the fact that to be free doesn’t automatically mean freedom has been gained?

When one looks at the fact, that we are set free on paper, yet we depend on everyone for survival. This has bled into our educational system that has for years been failing our children.

Why are still using the forms of standardized testing implemented by the British to test our children? Why do we still need to get accreditation from other countries before our children’s test results are placed on par with other countries so that they can go to school abroad?

After forty-nine years of independence why is the national average still a “D”? It’s a crying shame that this is where we are presently standing.

According to a survey done by the World Bank, the Caribbean countries has an 89% literacy rate which is surprisingly higher than the U.S.! Furthermore, The Bahamas ranks 7th in The Caribbean with a literacy rate of 95.6%. This tells me then than we as a people are just as capable of doing anything as any other country around the world.

If that is so, why are we still utilizing programs and systems from other countries to steer our educational system? Would not the people most suited to write programs for our schools, be other Bahamians that are well versed in Computer Technology?

This level of dependence will continue to stunt our students’ growth and progress. This was clearly seen, three weeks ago with the disastrous crashing of the LMS System utilized by the Ministry of Education that resulted in production of school report cards being delayed by two weeks!

Consequently, when report cards were picked up this past week, parents were not able to have their queries answered as teachers had already left for summer vacation. This is a prime example of why their needs to be an overhaul of the educational system and redesigned for optimal success of our children.

Finally, if we are to genuinely be independent, we must change the modus operandi of how we do business. We can no longer depend on Tourism to merely support us.

There must be a clear partisan, paradigm shift of our economy because income taxes are not going to do it!

While we were smart enough to rectify many of our impending problems, we must be strategic in our resolve moving forward collectively as a nation.

We need land reform. Sir Lynden Oscar Pindling institutionalized this country and I have not seen any other Prime Minister after him do so. Rather they have uplifted all their friends making them richer.

We have inherited over the last forty-nine years a tribal form of government, from both sides. The latest trend is maculating themselves in ego and positioning with the aim of personal gain first, as opposed to servanthood.

The wealth of this nation no longer trickles down, the status quo is ‘you get into politics, you take care of your friends.’

There is an Attaliah Spirt that has spread throughout the various ministries in this country, from education to government.

The continual assassination of those that try to bring change has always been overtaken by the misogyny imposed upon them and their voices hushed by the powers that be.

We must find another way to eliminate this Attaliah construct. As Nelson Mandela said, “For to be free is not merely to cast of one’s chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.”

After forty-nine years, are we living in true freedom or are we living a perception of what we think is liberty? Think on these things!

Source

CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) Raging Debate in The Bahamas Dies A Sudden Death

CSME Shelved

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

14th June 2005

Seeking to bring an end to the raging national debate on the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME), Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell on Monday announced that the government will not be signing the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas anytime soon.

In fact, Minister Mitchell said that it does not appear that the government will sign the Treaty, which establishes CSME, during this present term in office, which expires in 2007.

"There is a clear disconnect between the government and the wider community on this matter," said the Minister, who used the entire two hours allocated to him to contribute to the budget debate to address the CSME and other foreign affairs matters.

This meant that there was no room to address public service related issues or matters concerning his Fox Hill constituents.

Minister Mitchell said as it relates to the CSME, The Bahamas has reached the point where it must stop and review.

"The Bahamian people or more properly those who have created the din on the radio and in the press now have their wish," he announced.

"But they must know that it is not to me that they will have to answer for this, but to the future of this country."

Minister Mitchell said he was not panicked by the level of debate that led the government to decide to hold off on signing the Revised Treaty.

"The Bahamas has not signed the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas and cannot now sign in these present circumstances," he said.  "What we are now engaged in is a programme of public education and discussion on the issue.

"This has become a matter on which people are attacking me personally on a policy which is the decision of the government.  I told both the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister that I believe that my truthfulness has been called into question and my integrity challenged.  No Minister has to seek to ask permission of anyone to seek redress for attacks on his or her personal integrity."

He said what is particularly regrettable is that the forces who opposed the independence of The Bahamas in 1972 now seek to impugn his character by suggesting that he would compromise the sovereignty of The Bahamas.

Minister Mitchell said, "They are false prophets and crying crocodile tears because we know that they did not want The Bahamas to be free in the first place.  There is not a possible chance that this Minister, this individual, would compromise the sovereignty of The Bahamas."

Seeking to clarify what he called misinformation associated with the CSME debate, Minister Mitchell said, "It is clear that this matter of our participation in the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas will not be decided within this present term.

There is too much misinformation, disinformation and emotion; too much political dishonesty.  There is simply too much politics.  Accordingly, the Minister of Trade kindly agreed for me to speak to The Bahamas Commission on Trade.

"The Trade Commission's co-chair, Raymond Winder, has indicated by letter that subject to certain clarifications, they are ready and willing to work on the issues...The politics will hopefully then be out of the matter, the Commission will be free to review all the issues arising from the current debate, without a deadline, and the Ministry can now continue with other valuable projects in our Foreign Affairs.

It is only left for the government to provide a formal remit.  It is my hope that this effectively brings an end to this matter."

The Minister also said there has been "considerable misinformation and deliberate disinformation" about the matter or reservations to the Treaty.

The government has said repeatedly that if it signs the Revised Treaty, it would seek reservations on the free movement of people; the monetary union; the Caribbean Court of Justice at the appellate level; and the common external tariff.

Addressing the confusion surrounding whether the reservations would have an expiration date, the Minister said, "The reservations that are proposed are without end.

With regard to this treaty; once you sign a treaty with a reservation, the provisions of the treaty against which there are reservations do not apply to The Bahamas, neither can they be questioned in any court.  These are sovereign decisions of a sovereign government."

Minister Mitchell said that the CCJ reservation has been the cause of "considerable confusion."

"The confusion has been engendered by unintelligent ‐ at the very least disingenuous ‐ commentary by attorneys who ought to know better," he said.

Minister Mitchell announced that he will be representing Prime Minister Perry Christie at the next Heads of Government meeting set for St. Lucia early next month.

"The process of public education on this matter is nowhere near complete and so the question of signing anything in July does not arise," the Minister added.

He also spent much of his time lashing out at detractors whom he said have been spreading half-truths.

Minister Mitchell pointed to former Minister of Finance Sir William Allen, and former Minister of Economic Development Zhivargo Laing, saying, "They have been fudging, half truths and shades of deception, confused the public on this issue...This is the political season and no matter what the truth is, the response will be fudging, misinformation and mix up."

While he gave no attention to the public service in his address, Minister Mitchell, under whose portfolio the public service falls, also took a stab at John Pinder, president of The Bahamas Public Services Union.

"He is involved now in a campaign for reelection," the Minister pointed out.  "I can only imagine that anything will be said for headlines.  I have accused him before of always wanting to engage in the politics of rowing.  I did not believe for one moment that he would resort to a deliberate untruth which should be clear to him and clear, as the lawyers say, on the face of the record."

Minister Mitchell said it is "nonsense" for Mr. Pinder to say that the government signed the Revised Treaty on December 21, 2004.

The Minister also slammed Chairman of The Bahamas Financial Services Consultative Forum Brian Moree, who has criticized the government for its handling of the whole debate, and has urged the Christie Administration not to sign the new Treaty.

Mr. Moree has said that it makes no sense to sign such a treaty and opt out of four of its major provisions.

But Minister Mitchell indicated that he's baffled that Mr. Moree is vehemently opposed to the free movement of people under the CSME, when only a few months ago, he, as chairman of the Forum, released a controversial report strongly asking the government to liberalize its immigration laws.

"There are other critics," Minister Mitchell said.  "They have said some pretty appalling things about me personally and about the government.  One group that comes with the unfortunate acronym of BARF seems especially personally motivated...I only say this to the public: one should always look to see why a comment is being made and what interest is being served by that comment."

He said that it is clear that the detractors of his government on the CSME issue have one motto, and that is not to let the truth get in the way of a good story. 

Randol Fawkes' Appeal to The United Nations for Independence of The Bahama Islands

RANDOL FAWKES’ APPEAL TO THE UNITED NATIONS ON BAHAMAS NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE

MR CHAIRMAN,

 

DISTINGUISHED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMITTEE ON COLONIALISM

I am here today to secure the encouragement and the concrete assistance of the United Nations in the efforts of the people of the Bahama Islands to prepare themselves for independence.

In this we seek your expert advice and technical assistance in the promotion of the political, economic, and social advancement of The Bahamas that would make a transition from colonialism to freedom less painful than it otherwise would be.

It is our conviction that eternal colonialism in the Bahamas prevents the development of international and economic cooperation, impedes the social, economic and cultural development, and violates the spirit and letter of the Charter of the United Nations.  We therefore hope that the United Nations will recognize the indisputable right of The Bahamas to complete freedom and will help us to achieve and exercise our sovereignty and the intergrity of our national territory.  In faith believing, I relate the following:

On September 1966, your petitioner requested a select committee to take into consideration the advisability of inviting the government of the United Kingdom to convene a constitutional conference with a view to establishing the independence of the Bahama Islands.

Before the speaker could reach the item on the agenda calling for the appointment of select committees, The Premier, Sir Roland Symonette read the following prepared communication:  “I wish to make the following communication to the House in view of the public interest that has been aroused on the question of a constitutional conference on independence.  This is a statement that I would have given to the House on Thursday the 25^th August if the motion on the agenda for the appointment of a select committee on the subject had been proceeded with on that day:

As a result of the 1963 Constitutional Conference, the Bahamian Islands now enjoy a constitution which gives the people, through their representatives, virtually full control of their internal governmental affairs.

It has been suggested that because some other countries - perhaps less able to accept full autonomy – have become or are becoming independent, The Bahamas should do the same.  The government regards this attitude as misconceived.  Independence could be requested, and would no doubt be granted, and this government would be glad to manage the external affairs of the country but the facts must be looked squarely in the face.

Complete independence would impose on our country the financial burden of responsibility for security, defence and external affairs.  This burden is at present largely borne by Her Majesty’s government, at small cost within the framework of Britain’s defense and diplomatic commitments, but it would be extremely expensive, both in money and in manpower for The Bahamas government to take on the task of establishing embassies and high commissions abroad, and of raising and the equipping its own armed forces.  Considerable government funds would have to be diverted for these purposes which, in the view of this government, would be much better spent on the progress and development of the Bahama Islands for the good of all the inhabitants.  For these reasons the government cannot support proposals for a constitutional conference at the present time.”

In due course, the motion was put but was lost by a vote of thirteen to seven.   Both Progressive Liberal Bahamian Party and the National Democratic Party supported the motion, but the United Bahamian Party not only denied the courtesy of a select committee, but no member of the party participated in the debate.

Now if we were to examine the statement of the Premier, we will find that his argument against independence is facetious.  The premier stated that The Bahamas could not take on the expense of establishing embassies and high commissions abroad, but Gentlemen The Bahamas government is now maintaining very highly paid administrative offices in major cities of the world.  Some of them in London, Miami, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, St. Louis, Washington, and even in Bonn, Germany.

In many of these offices, Bahamian personal is either nil or negligible.  So the excuse that we cannot maintain an embassy is tenuous indeed.

According to the United Kingdom, we are not Africans, yet “Bahamians” is not a legal term under the constitution, and no one can say with any degree of truth that we are British.  As a people we are without history, without culture, and without a national identity.  We study British history, British culture, and even British weather, but about ourselves, we have no past – and in colonialism, no future.

Because of the colonial status, the value of the Bahamian dollar is questionable.  Should the British pound be devalued, it would have serious consequences on the economy of The Bahamas.

Because of our colonial status, Bahamians pay a penalty in the form of high custom duty for trading with countries other than the British Commonwealth.  Our economy is tied to the Western Hemisphere.  Indeed everything we eat and wear comes from the Caribbean, North or South America.

It has been suggested that The Bahamas has a democratic constitution based on municipal suffrage – one man, one vote.  Because members in the House of Assembly are not paid, only the rich are financially able to represent their districts – hence membership in the present assembly is composed mainly of the merchants and professional class, but the labouring class has only very limited representation.  In the past 200 years, only on two or three occasions have the Out Islands been able to have representation by a person who resides in the Out Islands.

This situation is aggravated by the fact that there is no local government of the Out Islands.  These areas are governed only by an appointed commissioner, but there are other elected bodies to assist in the administration.  Without more education and greater participation in government, the people will not be prepared to master the responsibilities of independence.

We therefore, request that the United Nations take swift action to influence Britain to set a time-table for the eventual independence of the Bahamas and; in the meantime a commission of United Nations experts should be appointed to make a survey of the political, economic and social conditions of The Bahamas with a view to introducing adequate measures that would prepare the Bahamian people to master their own responsibilities.

HOME to The Positive Achievements of Sir Randol Fawkes>>>