Contractors 'eagerly' awaiting word from PM on Baha Mar
By TANEKA THOMPSON
Tribune Staff Reporter
tthompson@tribunemedia.net
THE Bahamas Contractors' Association is "eagerly" awaiting word from the prime minister on his high-level meetings with the Chinese financiers of the $2.6 billion Baha Mar project.
Head of the association Stephen Wrinkle was hopeful that the matter would be discussed at length in the House of Assembly today. However a clerk in Parliament told The Tribune that the House of Assembly will not meet again until November 17.
"I guess everyone is eagerly awaiting his report. Once Cabinet is advised I would assume they would make their findings known in House of Assembly (today)," said BCA president Wrinkle yesterday.
The prime minister met with members of the BCA a day before he left for his official visit to China and took stock of their group's concerns, especially their push for increased Bahamian labour incorporated into Baha Mar, transfer of knowledge from skilled Chinese workers to Bahamian labourers and greater funding allocated to train locals working on the project.
"He took those along with him and hopefully he brings back good news," said Mr Wrinkle.
Mr Ingraham returned from his trip to China - after stopping in Barbados to attend the funeral of Prime Minister David Thompson - last Friday.
He has been quiet on what transpired during that trip.
However, Mr Wrinkle expects to hear positive news.
"We always expect to hear good news, we're hopeful, I know the prime minister and his delegation did his best to (negotiate) the best deal possible and whatever he's done, we'll take it and run with it," he said.
The Tribune understands that compromises "may have been reached" between Mr Ingraham and the Chinese over the concerns he has voiced about the level of Chinese labour participation in the Baha Mar project and the single phase of construction involved.
According to information reaching The Tribune last week, there were three "points of compromise" arrived at between Mr Ingraham during meetings with the China State Construction Company - the general contractor for the $2.6 billion Baha Mar resort development - and officials from the China Import Export Bank in Beijing.
One of these compromises is said to be that a larger quantity of construction work and related dollars will go to Bahamian contractors.
Two other negotiated points were that more funding - in the hundreds of millions of dollars - would be allocated towards the training of Bahamian workers and the transferring of skills/knowledge during the project and the proposal that while it would be built in one phase, the resort's six hotels would "open in phases."
November 10, 2010
tribune242
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label Bahamian labour. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bahamian labour. Show all posts
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Debate and division on 4,920 work permits for Chinese labour for the $2.6 billion Baha Mar Cable Beach resort complex heat up
PLP should be prepared for September 8
tribune242 editorial
SEPTEMBER 8th is D-Day for Baha Mar when parliamentarians will debate and vote on whether to approve 4,920 work permits for Chinese labour to build the $2.6 billion Cable Beach resort complex. The investment is backed by a loan from the Export-Import Bank of China. The resort will be constructed by China State Construction Engineering Corporation and the request for the permits comes from the People's Republic of China.
Legislators are caught on a cleft stick with this one -- a case of be damned if you do, or damned if you don't.
Bahamians have always been against foreign labour to the point that even the unskilled believe that as long as they are Bahamians - regardless of their lack of ability - they should get all jobs. However, today the economic situation is different. The construction business is down, Bahamians are desperate for work.
The question is are they desperate enough to suppress their grumbles and agree to these permits in order to stimulate the economy and find employment for themselves, or are they going to dig their heels in and say: "No."
According to Baha Mar if this project goes ahead it will create 3,300 temporary jobs for Bahamians during construction and 7,000 permanent jobs on completion.
We have always understood that wherever in the world Chinese investors build, they do it with their own labour. Looking at it from the Chinese point of view, their country also has to provide employment for their own people. It is their money which they invest in their citizens to create a project in a foreign land. On completion that project will then benefit the country in which it is located.
Mr Christie believes that the Chinese government -- with better negotiating skills on the part of Mr Ingraham -- could have been talked out of such an unusual request. Little does Mr Christie know. When these permits were first talked of the figures being tossed about were between 5,000 and 6,000 workers. If this is so to get the Chinese -- who we understand are adamant about their Chinese labour policy -- to drop down to 4,920 is a miracle in itself. However, if these permits are eventually agreed, with the exception of a handful of their top executives, everyone of them must return to China on the completion of the contract. This should be non-negotiable.
Mr Christie is agitated because - after many complaints of not being consulted by the Ingraham government -- he is now being asked to join that government in deciding whether these permits should be granted. For once he would rather Mr Ingraham let that bitter cup pass from him. He believes it is a cabinet decision, not his. However, what he must never forget is that if he had been more decisive in dealing with the Baha Mar development before he lost the government in 2007, there would have been no need for this debate. So not only is it incumbent upon Mr Christie and his colleagues to step up to the plate and vote on behalf of their constituents, but the PLP should recognise that what is being requested is unprecedented in Bahamian history. Therefore, voices from all segments of this country must be represented, and the only way to hear from the people is through their "representers."
We hope that Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell is not going to waste the time of the House by blaming Prime Minister Ingraham for losing the Harrah's Entertainment deal because of a statement he made in the House.
He must remember that the new owners of Harrah's -- as disclosed in a case before the Supreme Court of New York -- had decided to abandon the Baha Mar-Harrah's agreement before Mr Ingraham even spoke in the House.
Mr Mitchell must also be reminded of the January 25, 2006 letter of Sarkis Izmilian, CEO of Baha Mar, to Mr Christie, in which he stated that despite his (Izmilian's) "best efforts these past three odd years the Government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas (the Christie government) has failed me." Mr Izmilian added that he was at that time considering whether "investing billions of dollars in this country is the right decision."
It must also be remembered that the Christie government was still negotiating with Baha Mar up to two days before the 2007 election, which the PLP lost. Mr Mitchell must also recall that, because of the many rumours spinning around at the time, there was no way that the Ingraham government could sign the Christie government's unfinished agreement without much investigation. He must especially remember the "secret" agreements in the contract about the land deals that the Christie government knew would explode in its face if it came to the floor of the House and the knowledge of the Bahamian people. Therefore, a scheme was devised so that the controversial land transfers would not have to be approved by the House -- certainly not before the 2007 election.
"The country is desperately in need of relief in respect to this dire unemployment situation," Mr Christie told the press after a party meeting over the weekend to decide the position they would take in the September 8th debate. "The question for us is examining in detail what the implications are, the impact on Bahamian labour, and the length of time of the work permits."
This is the issue. When September 8th comes we hope that both sides stay focused. Regardless of whether the Christie Opposition tries to muddy the waters with red herrings, sits mute, or stays away, the position they take will be judged on that momentous day.
August 24, 2010
tribune242 editorial
tribune242 editorial
SEPTEMBER 8th is D-Day for Baha Mar when parliamentarians will debate and vote on whether to approve 4,920 work permits for Chinese labour to build the $2.6 billion Cable Beach resort complex. The investment is backed by a loan from the Export-Import Bank of China. The resort will be constructed by China State Construction Engineering Corporation and the request for the permits comes from the People's Republic of China.
Legislators are caught on a cleft stick with this one -- a case of be damned if you do, or damned if you don't.
Bahamians have always been against foreign labour to the point that even the unskilled believe that as long as they are Bahamians - regardless of their lack of ability - they should get all jobs. However, today the economic situation is different. The construction business is down, Bahamians are desperate for work.
The question is are they desperate enough to suppress their grumbles and agree to these permits in order to stimulate the economy and find employment for themselves, or are they going to dig their heels in and say: "No."
According to Baha Mar if this project goes ahead it will create 3,300 temporary jobs for Bahamians during construction and 7,000 permanent jobs on completion.
We have always understood that wherever in the world Chinese investors build, they do it with their own labour. Looking at it from the Chinese point of view, their country also has to provide employment for their own people. It is their money which they invest in their citizens to create a project in a foreign land. On completion that project will then benefit the country in which it is located.
Mr Christie believes that the Chinese government -- with better negotiating skills on the part of Mr Ingraham -- could have been talked out of such an unusual request. Little does Mr Christie know. When these permits were first talked of the figures being tossed about were between 5,000 and 6,000 workers. If this is so to get the Chinese -- who we understand are adamant about their Chinese labour policy -- to drop down to 4,920 is a miracle in itself. However, if these permits are eventually agreed, with the exception of a handful of their top executives, everyone of them must return to China on the completion of the contract. This should be non-negotiable.
Mr Christie is agitated because - after many complaints of not being consulted by the Ingraham government -- he is now being asked to join that government in deciding whether these permits should be granted. For once he would rather Mr Ingraham let that bitter cup pass from him. He believes it is a cabinet decision, not his. However, what he must never forget is that if he had been more decisive in dealing with the Baha Mar development before he lost the government in 2007, there would have been no need for this debate. So not only is it incumbent upon Mr Christie and his colleagues to step up to the plate and vote on behalf of their constituents, but the PLP should recognise that what is being requested is unprecedented in Bahamian history. Therefore, voices from all segments of this country must be represented, and the only way to hear from the people is through their "representers."
We hope that Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell is not going to waste the time of the House by blaming Prime Minister Ingraham for losing the Harrah's Entertainment deal because of a statement he made in the House.
He must remember that the new owners of Harrah's -- as disclosed in a case before the Supreme Court of New York -- had decided to abandon the Baha Mar-Harrah's agreement before Mr Ingraham even spoke in the House.
Mr Mitchell must also be reminded of the January 25, 2006 letter of Sarkis Izmilian, CEO of Baha Mar, to Mr Christie, in which he stated that despite his (Izmilian's) "best efforts these past three odd years the Government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas (the Christie government) has failed me." Mr Izmilian added that he was at that time considering whether "investing billions of dollars in this country is the right decision."
It must also be remembered that the Christie government was still negotiating with Baha Mar up to two days before the 2007 election, which the PLP lost. Mr Mitchell must also recall that, because of the many rumours spinning around at the time, there was no way that the Ingraham government could sign the Christie government's unfinished agreement without much investigation. He must especially remember the "secret" agreements in the contract about the land deals that the Christie government knew would explode in its face if it came to the floor of the House and the knowledge of the Bahamian people. Therefore, a scheme was devised so that the controversial land transfers would not have to be approved by the House -- certainly not before the 2007 election.
"The country is desperately in need of relief in respect to this dire unemployment situation," Mr Christie told the press after a party meeting over the weekend to decide the position they would take in the September 8th debate. "The question for us is examining in detail what the implications are, the impact on Bahamian labour, and the length of time of the work permits."
This is the issue. When September 8th comes we hope that both sides stay focused. Regardless of whether the Christie Opposition tries to muddy the waters with red herrings, sits mute, or stays away, the position they take will be judged on that momentous day.
August 24, 2010
tribune242 editorial
Obie Wilchcombe: ...the amount of foreign labour needed for the Baha Mar project is "politically toxic"
The PLP 'still want Baha Mar vote to be carried by govt'
tribune242
THE Progressive Liberal Party has reportedly voted in favour of continuing to allow the government to carry the burden of whether or not the Baha Mar labour resolution is passed in the House of Assembly when it is brought before Parliament next month.
According to party sources who spoke to The Tribune yesterday, the PLP met and discussed the matter on Sunday night, and have stuck to their initial position that this vote will have to be carried by the current "FNM government."
On Sunday, PLP leader Perry Christie said the party will of course be directly influenced by the "complete urgency" to do something for the economy of the Bahamas.
"It is an increasing serious state of affairs that exists here. The country is desperately in need of relief in respect to this dire unemployment situation. The question for us in examining in detail the implications of whatever the number of work permits are, the impact on Bahamian labour, and the length of time of the work permits," he said.
Having financially backed the $2.6 billion investment, the People's Republic of China is also requesting some 4,920 work permits for Chinese labour for the construction of the project. These work permits will come before Parliament in the resolution on September 8 to be voted on.
Leader of Opposition Business in the House of Assembly, Obie Wilchcombe, has already described the amount of foreign labour needed for the project as "politically toxic" - adding that the government is requiring Parliament to vote on the matter to avoid taking the brunt of what is expected to be massive public criticism in the near future.
August 24, 2010
tribune242
tribune242
THE Progressive Liberal Party has reportedly voted in favour of continuing to allow the government to carry the burden of whether or not the Baha Mar labour resolution is passed in the House of Assembly when it is brought before Parliament next month.
According to party sources who spoke to The Tribune yesterday, the PLP met and discussed the matter on Sunday night, and have stuck to their initial position that this vote will have to be carried by the current "FNM government."
On Sunday, PLP leader Perry Christie said the party will of course be directly influenced by the "complete urgency" to do something for the economy of the Bahamas.
"It is an increasing serious state of affairs that exists here. The country is desperately in need of relief in respect to this dire unemployment situation. The question for us in examining in detail the implications of whatever the number of work permits are, the impact on Bahamian labour, and the length of time of the work permits," he said.
Having financially backed the $2.6 billion investment, the People's Republic of China is also requesting some 4,920 work permits for Chinese labour for the construction of the project. These work permits will come before Parliament in the resolution on September 8 to be voted on.
Leader of Opposition Business in the House of Assembly, Obie Wilchcombe, has already described the amount of foreign labour needed for the project as "politically toxic" - adding that the government is requiring Parliament to vote on the matter to avoid taking the brunt of what is expected to be massive public criticism in the near future.
August 24, 2010
tribune242
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)