Bahamians Decide Their Future On Monday May 07, 2012... ...We will choose between a decisive leader, who will achieve much for the country... or an indecisive leader who will let others take the lead... ...The Bahamian people hold their destiny in their own hands... ...Choose wisely...

Bahamians Decide Their Future On Monday

tribune242 

LAST WEEK, a young Bahamian came to see us. He wanted to talk. It was about the election, but, according to him, it was mainly about his future, which the outcome of the election would determine.

He loved the Bahamas. To him it was home -- a place he never thought he could leave. But Monday's election, and the attitude of many Bahamians, discouraged him.

"If," he said, "after all that Mr Ingraham and his government have done for the Bahamian people, especially during a world recession, they can't understand and appreciate, what is the future for this country? We are just starting to move out of our economic decline. Do you know what would happen if the PLP returned -- everything would stop, and it you think things are bad now, it will be a disaster should they get in on Monday."

"I have been thinking," he said, "if the FNM lose this election, why should I dedicate the rest of my life in trying to help build a country in which a people are so blind and unappreciative."

All Bahamians had to do, he said, was look around them, make comparisons with the PLP's five years of treading water to see the dynamic progress -- despite the hard times -- during the Ingraham years.

His words reminded us of the epithet to Sir Christopher Wren engraved on the walls of St Paul's Cathedral: "Reader, if you want to see my monument, look around you."

After the Great Fire of London in 1666, Sir Christopher was commissioned to rebuild the city. St Paul's was his masterpiece.

The young Bahamian was particularly annoyed at the attitude of the civil service unions. During the world's economic collapse, civil servants were among the first to be fired to reduce each government's costs -- even in the great United States. Not so the Bahamas. Prime Minister Ingraham made certain that no civil servant lost his or her job. Yet, while fellow Bahamians were losing their homes, and their private sector jobs, unionists, secure in their posts, were selfishly bleating for more.

The PLP, smug in its belief of entitlement, was so shocked at losing the 2007 election that it commissioned a research company to find out why.

The first recommendation was that the PLP had to expand its support base. Greenberg Quinlan Rosher found that the PLP won the majority of its votes among the 60 and over age group. It also attracted a socio-economic group with less than a high school education. Over the years the PLP have successfully played on this group's ignorance. But obviously, time is eroding that base.

Also, the report said, the party had to cleanse itself of its scandal-ridden reputation. The party had to take "concrete actions that convey its seriousness about purging corruption from the party and state." The perception among voters, it said, was that the PLP was "more focused on doing things that benefit its own politicians than for people."

Another crucial point was Mr Perry Christie's leadership qualities. There is no disputing that Mr Christie is personally popular, but, said the report, "voters equate his leadership style with weakness." This had to change. To succeed Mr Christie had to be seen as a "forceful, decisive leader."

While prime minister, he appeared too weak and forgiving -- a man completely unable to purge his government of those causing the scandal. How much has he changed? On Monday he is offering the Bahamian people much of the same crew that caused him his problems from 2002 to 2007. Among the new faces are at least two, who if reports can be believed, could cause him future credibility problems.

Obviously, he has shown no strength here, and watching him on the campaign trail one gets the distinct impression that it is his deputy -- "Brave" Davis and not Perry Christie - who is the man in charge. This, again, if what we hear is true, could spell problems in the not too distant future. Many Bahamians are uneasy about the possibility of such a leadership switch.

And so "scandal" is a word that the PLP should quietly tip-toe around -- the day is coming when it will turn to bite them.

On Monday, voters have a choice between two men -- one a strong, leader who accomplishes much, the other, a man who has difficulty making decisions.

We recall a radio talk show many years ago when what sounded like the voice of an elderly Bahamian called the station to relate his experience. The discussion was about Mr Ingraham being a dictator and doing everything himself rather than leaving it up to his ministers. The caller came to the Prime Minister's defence. He said that Mr Ingraham was forced to move in when others failed to do their job. He then told his personal story.

He said he had what to him was a major problem. He took it to his MP, but got no satisfaction. He then went to the heads of several departments that were causing him grief, still nothing was settled. In desperation, he knocked on the door of the prime minister. He found it easier to open the PM's door than that of his own representative.

When he left, he said, he had all his answers. A few telephone calls were made and his problems were solved.

That is the kind of Prime Minister that Bahamians need - and, said my young friend who was concerned about his future under a PLP-led government, all Bahamians have to do is discard their PLP blinkers and see all the accomplishments made on their behalf in the past five years under an FNM government.

It is now up to the Bahamian people.

On Monday they will choose between a decisive leader, who will achieve much for the country, or an indecisive leader who will let others take the lead.

Bahamians hold their destiny in their own hands. We hope that they choose wisely.

May 04, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International

The essential differences between Messrs Hubert Ingraham and Perry Christie revealed

We Have No Choice?
by Simon


The House of Assembly debated a resolution on the Baha Mar deal recently. Unfortunately for the Perry Christie-led PLP, it has already lost the broader national debate on the proposed mega project.

This includes a haemorrhaging of goodwill from the PLP by many professionals and even many within the party who are flabbergasted and frustrated by Mr. Christie’s dissembling and series of incoherent statements on Baha Mar since its inception. Curiously, part of the story concerns – the BlackBerry.

Some weeks ago, Mr. Christie attempted to mock the Prime Minister for regularly checking his BlackBerry at a dinner attended by both leaders. Mr. Ingraham was monitoring any news of a settlement between Baha Mar and Scotiabank on an outstanding loan between the two entities.

The story reveals the essential differences between Messrs. Ingraham and Christie. Hubert Ingraham is a part of the Smartphone generation while his former law partner is a throwback to a bygone era, wedded to a model of economic development that is being assigned to the proverbial ash heap of history.

Mr. Ingraham’s use of the BlackBerry represents a forward-looking, tech-savvy style of leadership marked by a hands-on approach, timeliness and engagement. This is in marked contrast to Mr. Christie’s cavalier, late-again and disengaged style. The device that perhaps best represents his decision-making style is the telegraph, which in today’s world would be slow-moving, clunky and out-of-date.

But, the more defining difference between the men was revealed in one of the more shocking statements ever made by a Bahamian leader on a project as large and as involved as Baha Mar.

WE HAVE NO CHOICE?

On the eve of Mr. Ingraham’s departure for China, the Leader of the Opposition counselled the Prime Minister to take the Baha Mar deal as it was. His reckless advice: We have no choice! We have no choice?

One would have expected this to be the view of officials at Baha Mar, not of a former Prime Minister. Life is filled with choices, even in the most difficult circumstances.

It is clear that Mr. Christie would have headed to China on bended knee, as an agent for Baha Mar, representing narrow special interests rather than the broader Bahamian national interest.

Mr. Christie’s view that the country had no choice but to accept the Baha Mar deal as is, is the clearest insight yet into why he essentially gave away Bahamian treasure and land at Cable Beach which no Bahamian leader from the UBP, PLP or FNM ever did.

It explains the Great Mayaguana Land Give-Away in which beachfront property equivalent of the distance from the eastern end of New Providence to Lyford Cay was alienated to foreign interests.

It reveals why his party’s land policy has been disastrous for The Bahamas and why his talk of Bahamianization is mostly talk. It further demonstrates why Mr. Christie and the PLP are content to sell cheaply our national ambitions and dreams to foreign interests, often to the cheapest bidder, rather than genuinely empower Bahamians.

Thankfully, Mr. Ingraham disregarded Mr. Christie’s monstrously bad advice in his negotiations with the Chinese. He did so because he knows that The Bahamas indeed has a choice, indeed a number of choices, as we slowly recover from a global economic crisis.

HEAD-TO-HEAD

Rather than bended-knee, Mr. Ingraham went head-to-head with Chinese officials. Whereas Mr. Christie felt there was no choice than to accept $200 million dollars worth of contracts for Bahamians, Mr. Ingraham got that number doubled to $400 million. Those contracts will now include work on the Core Project which was not in the original deal.

In his Sunday press conference Mr. Ingraham noted that contracts will be awarded to large, medium, small scale and individual contractors. This is broad economic empowerment in fact, rather than just in talk.

Mr. Ingraham insisted on and got a sizable expansion of training opportunities for Bahamian workers and professionals. This dovetails with his administration’s revamping of the Bahamas Technical and Vocational Institute under revised legislation passed this year. It may also build on the National Retraining initiative launched last year.

The Prime Minister also suggested that there may have been some movement on phasing in the number of rooms at Baha Mar over a designated period of time.

Whatever the final outcome on this matter, it is clear that Mr. Ingraham went to China to negotiate a better deal for the country, as opposed to Mr. Christie who it appears may have gone simply for a signing ceremony and pomp in circumstances that would not have been as advantageous to The Bahamas.

WATERSHED

As noted previously in this column, the Baha Mar deal has been a watershed in terms of the vision and quality of governance demonstrated by Mr. Ingraham and the FNM in stark contrast to that of Mr. Christie and the PLP.

It must be a source of considerable angst for the latter, that the project they initiated has been re-negotiated on better terms and will be launched by an Ingraham-led FNM Government. History eclipses those who are irresolute, procrastinating and dithering when decisiveness is required.

The Bahamas deserves better than political, business or civic leaders telling us that we have no choice in charting our national destiny, despite the rough seas we are facing. This is the talk of those who are dragged along hopelessly by the stream events, rather than tacking and turning to navigate those events to one’s better advantage.

On Baha Mar and other foreign investment projects, Mr. Christie has shown that he is mastered and sidelined by events. Through painstaking negotiations Mr. Ingraham has shown that he knows how to shape events, even when presented with as problematic a deal as the initial one placed on the table by Baha Mar.

Mr. Christie’s declaration that the country had no choice on Baha Mar proved stunningly incorrect. It will prove to be one of the more disastrous pronouncements he has made in his long political career. It is a mistake the Bahamian people will clearly take into account as they make their choice at the next general election.

bahamapundit

Bahamas Blog International

Hubert Ingraham versus Perry Christie - and the emerging Chinese superpower

Another Watershed for Ingraham & Christie
by Simon
bahamapundit


Hubert Ingraham arrived in China in a strong and enviable position. Much of this comes from the office he holds as Prime Minister of a strategically-located Bahamas with diverse and impressive assets relative to our size.

Moreover, a considerable amount of the Prime Minister’s strengthened position is rooted in his character and experience, including a combination of international experience and domestic credibility.

The posture with which Mr. Ingraham has travelled to the emerging Chinese superpower is in obvious and stark contrast to the posture with which former Prime Minister Perry Christie would have made this journey.

Mr. Christie would have gone in a considerably weaker position for reasons rooted in his political character, including an operating style marked by indecision and pandering.

Whereas Mr. Ingraham enters into a negotiation with some inscrutability and poker-faced, Mr. Christie is generally an easy mark, easy to read and easy to push over. Bahamians know that Mr. Ingraham will always drive a harder bargain while Mr. Christie is prone to give away the store.

Domestic Credibility: On the eve of his departure for China, Mr. Ingraham and his predecessor, Opposition Leader, Perry Christie each held a press conference. In tone and substance they were a study in contrast.

Mr. Ingraham noted that Baha Mar was among one of a wide range of issues on the agenda during his trip. The Leader of the Opposition’s press conference focused almost exclusively on Baha Mar, with little reference to various other bilateral matters. Yet, what they both said about Baha Mar was revealing.

WATERSHED

The debate over Baha Mar has been another watershed for these former law partners and cabinet colleagues. The current debate is etching into the national consciousness the essential differences between the men in terms of vision, character and governance.

In his brief statement at a press conference in which Dr. Bernard Nottage took the lead in outlining the PLP’s position on Baha Mar, Mr. Christie left little doubt that he would have headed to China mostly as the gushing representative of Baha Mar.

In one of the most disturbing public performances by someone who served as prime minister, Mr. Christie all but abandoned the national interest in the favour of a private interest. It is an interest that has repeatedly demonstrated that it lacked the vision, track record and wherewithal to redevelop Cable Beach. Indeed, Baha Mar has repeatedly failed to meet various deadlines over the course of several years.

Just in September, Mr. Sarkis Izmirlian, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Baha Mar spoke at a 25th anniversary event marking the China State Construction and Engineering Company’s presence in the United States.

“As some of you may know, my family and I have a vision for the country of The Bahamas, and its huge potential for tourism. We were approached by the Bahamian Government to consider redeveloping a beautiful area of Nassau called Cable Beach.”

Mr. Izmirlian also spoke glowingly that a successful Baha Mar project would “showcase to the world China State’s ability to deliver an intricately designed, and complex, resort metropolis on a somewhat remote island in The Caribbean.”

So, what exactly is Mr. Izmirilian’s vision for The Bahamas, and when exactly did we outsource that vision to a private developer? And, when did New Providence become a “somewhat remote island in the Caribbean?”

Mr. Izmirlian may want to check this bit of condescension and take note that many Bahamians do not find his vision for Cable Beach in the country’s broader interest. But it is not primarily Mr. Izmirlian who the Bahamian people are questioning.

EQUITABLE DEAL

Bahamians continue to wonder why Mr. Christie and the PLP chose the family in question to redevelop one of the more valued tourism sites in the country. Whatever the reasons, the PLP cannot shirk responsibility for the fact that it is because of that choice that we are in the position we are today. Because of Baha Mar’s lack of resources, the company turned to China for financing.

The genesis and convoluted nature of the Baha Mar project rest with Mr. Christie. As the drama at Baha Mar continues to unfold, Mr. Christie and the PLP have delivered a series of mixed and often incoherent messages. This rambling has damaged their domestic credibility on Baha Mar and related matters.

While Mr. Ingraham has repeatedly stressed that his overriding concern is an equitable deal for The Bahamas, the PLP and Mr. Christie have shown divided loyalties on the Baha Mar project. Sometimes, their posturing and pandering has been comical.

Having agreed to Chinese workers building the new National Stadium and signalling that they would agree to a considerable Chinese presence to build Baha Mar, the PLP voted against allowing Chinese workers to construct the Gateway Road Project.

Never mind that there would be Bahamian workers on the road project and that the terms of the loan were quite generous. The PLP sought to score a political brownie point and ride a wave of hysteria about a Chinese takeover. Not only did most Bahamians see through such an obvious ploy, so did the Chinese Government.

In striking contrast, Ingraham has demonstrated to the Chinese that while he is prepared to do business with them, that it must be mutually beneficial to both countries. He has refrained from any China-bashing in order to pander to some elements of the populace. Undoubtedly, the Chinese have taken note.

The Chinese must also be bemused and amused by Mr. Christie’s chest-thumping on the National Stadium. The stadium is a typical gift of the Chinese Government after the launch of diplomatic relations with a developing country.

In this case, those relations were established during a previous Ingraham administration. Moreover, even after the offer of a national stadium, the Christie administration, in typical fashion, failed to get the construction started.

FAVOURABLE COMMENTARY

The Prime Minister’s tough pre-trip stance to the Chinese Government of what may be acceptable regarding Baha Mar has earned him favourable commentary in various quarters in the Caribbean. Most Bahamians are relieved that it is Mr. Ingraham and not Mr. Christie who has journeyed to China to negotiate on the country’s behalf.

International Experience: Mr. Ingraham’s domestic credibility boosts and mirrors his credibility with the Chinese Government. That credibility is reinforced by Mr. Ingraham’s decisiveness. Reportedly, the Chinese were as frustrated by Mr. Christie’s late-again manner as were the Bahamian people.

Mr. Ingraham appointed two senior figures as Bahamian Ambassador to China, including Sir Arthur Foulkes who was non-resident and former cabinet minister Elma Chase Campbell, the first resident Ambassador. While the PLP did eventually send a resident diplomat to China, it took a while and he was a relatively junior civil servant.

It is a no-brainer for the Chinese which Bahamian leader they trust to talk straight to them. It is the man and the leader of the party which, in 1997, inaugurated diplomatic relations with the most populous country on earth. It decidedly is not the leader of the party that was about to send an ambassador to Taiwan if it had won re-election.

The Chinese also respect seniority. This is the Prime Minister’s second official visit to China, his first having occurred 13 years ago. Mr. Ingraham’s international resume is extensive as a senior head of government in the Americas. He has served as Chairman of Caricom on various occasions, where he is the senior leader in the regional grouping.

Prime Minister Ingraham has overseen the bilateral interests of The Bahamas with three American Presidents from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush to Barack Obama. Recently, he was elected to chair the Boards of Governors of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group.
One of the press reports following Mr. Ingraham’s election noted: “The chairman’s country should also be in good standing in the international community, and the person selected to be chairman is expected to be widely respected among finance and development officials.”

The Chinese will have all of this information in their briefing notes on Mr. Ingraham as he and his delegation travel from Hong Kong to Beijing to Shanghai and are hosted at various meals.

They will find in Hubert Ingraham an appreciative guest. Yet, they will also discover, like Mr. Izmirlian, that the current Bahamian Prime Minister will not be swayed by pomp and circumstance or flattery and a few nice meals.

bahamapundit

Bahamas Blog International