The facts of Haitian President Michel Martelly visit to The Bahamas have been twisted out of all proportion... not only by the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader - Bran McCartney... but by Opposition leader Perry Christie and his Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) colleagues

The Haitian president not invited - just passing through

tribune242 editorial




DNA LEADER Bran McCartney has called for the immediate resignation of Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, accusing him of committing treason for allowing Haitian President Michel Martelly not only to overnight in the Bahamas, but to meet with his nationals while here.

"We are calling for the immediate resignation of Hubert Alexander Ingraham," DNA leader Bran McCartney told the press. "He has shamelessly disgraced our nation, his authority and this nation's ideals. He has insulted our people and his post as CEO of the Bahamas. He should indeed bow his head and be cast out, as it is clear he has denounced his citizenship in order to put another country's interest before his own."

What a fiery young man Mr McCartney has turned out to be. The more he talks, the more he confirms our opinion that we are dealing with a political novice who needs much more time to mature. At this critical stage of our country's development, this is not the type of ill-informed leadership that is needed. It almost sounds as though we have a budding dictator on our hands.

The facts of the Martelly visit have been twisted out of all proportion, not only by Mr McCartney, but by Opposition leader Perry Christie and his colleagues.

To listen to them, one would have thought that Mr Ingraham had given President Martelly a script from which to read. Mr Ingraham did not invite the president to Nassau. He did not tell him that before he could talk to his own people he had to first submit a script of what he intended to say to the Bahamas government, and if he dared misstep he would be kicked out of the country. This certainly is not the procedure expected of a democratic country.

Mr McCartney also condemned Mr Christie for being "too quiet on this issue of national importance". We would have expected Mr Christie, a seasoned politician, to have continued his silence on the matter knowing the protocol of such visits. But not Mr Christie, he could not be seen by his supporters as being weak and so was goaded on to make himself look foolish. After all, it was Mr Christie and his party that seemed to take more of a personal interest in the President's presence than did Mr Ingraham and his government.

For example, no FNM politicians attended the Joe Farrington Road meeting when President Martelly addressed his people. However, there certainly were PLP politicians present that night, among them MP Alfred Sears, former PLP attorney general, and Dr Andre Rollins, PLP candidate for Fort Charlotte. And so, until he could read the news the next day, neither Mr Ingraham, nor any of his cabinet, knew what the Haitian president had said to the estimated 7,000 persons crowded around him that night.

Mr Ingraham officially met the president in his office the next morning -- before he had had an opportunity to be briefed on what had taken place the evening before. However, Mr Christie later in the day not only knew what had been said -- to which he now so strongly objects -- but entertained Mr Martelly at his home with several of his PLP colleagues around him. If Mr Christie, or any of his colleagues, had disagreed with anything that had been said the night before, it was there and then that they should have had a discussion and cleared the air. But no, Mr Christie had to jump on the political bandwagon and condemn the visit. Did he really believe in what he was saying from a public platform, or was it only after being accused of being "too quiet" that he spoke up?

President Martelly neither asked, nor did he need permission to visit the Bahamas.
Contrary to Mr McCartney's statement, the Bahamas government did not invite Mr Martelly to the Bahamas. The President's government notified Foreign Affairs that Mr Martelly would be passing through the Bahamas on his way to Mexico. While here, he wanted to meet with the Prime Minister and the Governor General. These meetings took place.

Mr Ingraham said that Mr Martelly needed no permission to meet with his people.
He pointed out that the PLP went to London to meet with "Bahamian students in connection with the election that is coming up to encourage them to support the PLP because they have overseas voting. They went to Jamaica to do the same thing. They went to Miami, Atlanta and, I believe, New York, etc. Do you think they asked President Barack Obama whether they could come and do that? Of course not. Did they ask Prime Minister Cameron of Great Britain? No, they didn't. Why should the Haitian or the Jamaican or anybody else need to ask us permission to do so? We are a free country. We are a democracy. And just as we are able to go to other people's country and meet with our nationals at any time of our choosing, why shouldn't they have the same right to do so in The Bahamas?"

However, Mr Ingraham did give Mr McCartney some sound advice.

"One of the things that young politicians and old politicians ought to do," he said, "is to establish themselves as credible persons; that you take steps to verify things before you make pronouncements. You don't go and shoot your mouth off and make statements that are untrue and that can easily be verified in advance. Carelessness is not a good thing for a young politician, or indeed an old politician. I caution Mr McCartney not to continue telling lies."

February 13, 2012

tribune242 editorial

Caribbean Blog International

Is it Bran? ...What should we make of Mr. Branville McCartney and the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party? ...Can we take them seriously? ...Are they really the contenders they insist they are or that many believe they are? ...Or are they just another passing fad, destined to go the way of the CDR, BDM, and NDP, just with a lot more wasted money and energy?

Gone Green?

By Ian G. Strachan

Most Bahamians would welcome new personalities at the helm of our two major parties. Inspired by the election of Barack Obama, they dream of political renewal in this country ushered by some eloquent, able visionary who will bring the nation to a sense of unity and purpose we haven’t felt in a generation.

Though Hubert Ingraham and Barack Obama share the same birthday, the men represent very different things in the minds of the people. The loquacious Perry Christie is likewise, unable to sustain such a comparison.  And though I will grant that Obama has in no way been as successful as many hoped he would be, we are talking here about what he represented in the imagination of Americans, black and white, and what he represented to the world: rebirth, a change from politics as usual.  That was the dream he sold.  Where is our Obama then?

Is it Bran?  What should we make of Mr. Branville McCartney and the Democratic National Alliance?  Can we take them seriously?  Are they really the contenders they insist they are or that many believe they are?  Or are they just another passing fad, destined to go the way of the CDR, BDM, and NDP, just with a lot more wasted money and energy?

Are we looking at the next government of The Bahamas, the next page in Bahamian history, the revolution we’ve all been waiting for, the wave of change that will sweep away all that we’re weary of in public affairs?  Or are we looking at the elaborate and glorious endgame of an inexperienced, over-eager and over-rated politician and his rag-tag band of hangers on?

Whichever it is, one thing is certain: in a very short space of time Bran McCartney has become one of the most popular and most talked about politicians in the country.  ‘Going Green’ was never as popular a statement as it is now, except it has nothing to do with environmental conservation.

I’m a resident of the Bamboo Town constituency (for the time being).   I can say that as a candidate and as a representative, McCartney is enthusiastic and active.   It was clear during the ’07 campaign that he enjoyed the opportunity he was being given and he was determined to make the most of it.  Could he have beaten Frank Smith if he had run in St. Thomas More instead?  Ingraham didn’t seem to think so.  But I’ll say this: before McCartney, Bamboo Town had never enjoyed the kind of attention paid to it by this representative.

The parties for the elderly, the community bus, the various educational and outreach programs emanating out of the constituency office, all demonstrate that McCartney was and is prepared to take ham and turkey politics to the next level.  Is the work he is doing in Bamboo Town what I think an MP ought to be doing?  No.  I believe a community center, government and volunteer staffed, ought to be doing that work permanently in Bamboo Town and every constituency in fact.  As it stands, that work is happening so long as McCartney is MP.  What happens after he is not?

Once McCartney was elected and was able to escape the confines of the Ministry of Tourism and Aviation, he found himself in an ideal position to showcase his abilities (or at least to showcase his ambitions).  Now there is nothing wrong with ambition in and of itself; and there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with being opportunistic.  The problem is always how far you’re prepared to go and what you are prepared to do or say to get what you want.

And McCartney showed that he would miss no opportunity to call attention to himself, and to zealously hunt down illegals and ship them out.  He did for Immigration what Ron Pinder did for garbage collection, which is a disturbing but apropos comparison, given what we think of Haitians.

There was Bran in fatigues, there was Bran bidding people farewell as they boarded a plane to be repatriated, there was Bran in the helicopter showing us where those shantytowns were located, there was Bran feeding the people at the Nassau dump . . .  It was shameless.  But here’s the thing: I am probably in the minority for thinking so. Many, maybe most Bahamians, were impressed, cheered, celebrated, thought he was fantastic.  It seems far too easy to impress Bahamian voters, but there you have it.

More on Bran and the DNA, next week.

Oct 10, 2011

Gone Green? - Part 2

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

What does the Bahamian electorate really think of Perry Christie? ... Is he more popular and more respected than Hubert Ingraham? ... Than Bran McCartney?

Christie’s keys to success (Pt. 1)

By Dr. Ian Strachan

Logic would seem to dictate that in this long season of discontent, in this season of record unemployment, in this season of record bloodshed, in this interminable season of frustrating, confusing, infuriating “road works”, in this season of collapse for many homegrown businesses, in this time of rising fuel and food prices, logic would seem to dictate that the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), under Perry Gladstone Christie, will be swept into office and the Free National Movement (FNM) will be ingloriously swept out.

Logic would seem to dictate that the FNM will be hard pressed to secure seats in New Providence other than those held by Brent Symonette, Dr. Hubert Minnis and Loretta Butler-Turner.

But there are some problems with this assessment.  There are some very big questions looming like storm clouds over the PLP.  The first is whether enough people feel comfortable returning Perry Christie to power.  The second is whether the PLP has changed sufficiently or has a strong enough message to persuade crucial swing voters that the PLP is still the best alternative, despite how they feel about Leslie Miller, Bradley Roberts, Picewell Forbes, V. Alfred Gray, Shane Gibson, Allyson Maynard-Gibson and company.

It might seem reasonable to assume that the PLP hasn’t really lost much of its base since 2007.  In fact, that base should have grown over the last four years given all the suffering and fear in the country.  But the fact is, most Bahamians want to see a change in leadership in both established political parties, and they’re not going to get it.  So interest in this election might be lower than normal.  Even some traditional PLPs may register but stay away on election day.

It’s also reasonable to assume that some of the swing vote that was attracted to the National Democratic Party’s “Bahamians-first” message might gravitate toward the PLP, now that Dr. Andre Rollins and Renward Wells have joined and the NDP has fizzled.  Their inclusion bodes well for Christie, particularly if they both get nominations.  They will appeal to young change-minded voters.

But what do people really think of Perry Christie?  Is he more popular and more respected than Hubert Ingraham?  Than Bran McCartney?  Without the national affection and regard felt for former PLP deputy leader Cynthia ‘Mother’ Pratt to buoy him, can Christie gain the confidence and trust of the majority of voters?  The Christian community (which is mostly Baptist and Pentecostal) and the working poor identified strongly with ‘Mother’ Pratt. Where will the PLP get that kind of credibility from now?  Is Deputy Leader Brave Davis a help or a hindrance?  What about Chairman Bradley Roberts?  Should Christie have persuaded Dr. Bernard Nottage, a man highly regarded by swing voters and Bahamians generally, to go for deputyship?  Will the ghost of Lynden Pindling or the dignity and grace of Dame Marguerite be enough this time around?

Christie’s Achilles’ heel is the perception that he is a less decisive and results oriented, and a less effective manager than Ingraham.  This is a big sticking point for the swing vote and the professional class.  But Christie is not without advantages in this fight.  For one, he is the warmer of the two men in interviews and more of an inspirational leader than Ingraham.  The people may be tired of Ingraham’s short, dry-eyed approach and may want someone they perceive as more sympathetic and approachable at the helm.

Christie also has the luxury of sitting back and poking holes in all the FNM’s efforts to address the troubled justice and educational systems and the sputtering economy.  Christie knows most voters have short memories and don’t care about what the PLP did or didn’t do five to 10 years ago.  This is why he can say he supports hanging and not get laughed out of town.

Christie also has at his disposal the collective disenchantment, anger and fear that permeates the society.  He is likely to milk this for all it’s worth and it’s worth a lot.  Many of the angry and disenchanted will abstain from voting or vote DNA, but at least they won’t vote FNM.   If the PLP can get its base out to the polls and woo even half or a third of the angry voters out there, it stands a good chance of coming out on top--even if “on top” means heading a minority or coalition government.

Sep 05, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International