Showing posts with label Branville McCartney DNA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Branville McCartney DNA. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Value Added Tax (VAT) is unfair, untimely, unreasonable and undesirable ... says Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader, Branville McCartney

Vat Is 'Unfair, Untimely And Unreasonable' - Dna


Tribune242:


DNA leader Branville McCartney continued his push for the government to rethink the introduction of Value Added Tax (VAT), calling it an “unfair, untimely, and unreasonable” burden to place on the backs of Bahamians.

Noting that in September 2012, five months prior to the failed gambling poll, Minister of State for Finance Michael Halkitis, in response to the sovereign credit downgrade by Standard & Poor, indicated that the Government was planning to release its Tax Reform White Paper for public consultation “next month” (October 2012), Mr McCartney said it is clear from all indications that the idea of introducing VAT was well in play prior to January 2013.

“The Prime Minister confirmed this during the mid-term budget debate in February 2013 saying; ‘The Government is implementing a broad tax reform package that includes the introduction of a Value Added Tax (VAT) in July 2014. While that is an ambitious timeframe, I would note that we have had the benefit of detailed studies of the feasibility of VAT in The Bahamas’.”

Mr McCarntey added: “Mr Christie in the House of Assembly continued: ‘The White Paper (which was completed in September 2012) contains a fully articulated policy framework for VAT. Following the public consultation process, the Government will present a refined proposal, and advanced legislation to bring VAT into effect’. We are gravely concerned about Mr Christie who recently suggested to Parliament and the nation that the Prime Minister had high level talks with the Minister of Finance on the VAT issue.

“At this meeting the Prime Minister confirmed that the Minister of Finance, who apparently does not listen to the Prime Minister, was moving ahead on VAT and for this reason he (the Prime Minister) left him (the Minister of Finance) at home and would only let the Prime Minister speak.”

With these comments in mind, Mr McCartney said the public needs to worry that Mr Christie’s views are “schizophrenic” on this issue as he appears to be blaming “his alter ego for VAT”.

“Mr Michael Halkitis, the Minister of State for Finance, stated earlier this year that, apart from the imposition of Value Added Tax (VAT), the Bahamas has no other viable option to spark the required streams of revenue it needs to arrest government debt.

“However, Prime Minister Christie, speaking either as Prime Minister or one of his alter egos, stated that if anyone in the public sector has a better idea he is ready to listen. Numerous local and foreign consultancy groups later, we in the Democratic National Alliance ask, is this the same Christie who in 2013 rejected the Nassau Institute commissioned independent research study of ‘The Potential Impact of VAT for our country’ by Mr David Godsell accusing him of ‘distorting the truth’, and dismissed the DNA’s ideas as ‘nonsense’?

“Our country has not rebounded from the most devastating recession we have ever had and in light of the pending introduction of Value Added Tax we in the DNA are left to wonder if this current government truly cares about Bahamians. It cannot be fair for struggling hard working citizens of the Bahamas trying to make ends meet to now be faced with the fear of not being able to afford the basic survival items because of VAT. Moreover, the people of the Bahamas must be reminded that this government campaigned on putting people back to work and instead they now propose to put extra taxes on their backs,” he said.

At this time, the DNA leader noted, VAT is unfair, untimely, unreasonable and undesirable.

He said: “Mr Prime Minister there are alternatives… you just need to listen. Bahamians are living in a state of fear. Fear of crime, fear of increasing financial insecurity, and now, fear of VAT. There is no clear vision in sight from this group of merry men in the PLP. Their leader has been late, inconsistent and out of touch with the issues that face Bahamians daily.

“Our country is at a critical crossroad and demands that we make the tough decisions to lead our country to prosperity. We need strong dynamic leadership with a clear vision for our country. We need leadership that is not afraid to lead.”

February 24, 2014

Friday, January 27, 2012

Branville McCartney - Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader's gross error in judgement in relations to his party’s MICAL candidate, Delano Munroe ...who is facing a criminal charge... ...stealing by reason of employment...

The DNA leader’s mistake


thenassauguardian editorial




Branville McCartney, leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), is new to politics.  He is just finishing his first term as a member of Parliament.  Yet, he leads a party which hopes to have a permanent presence in The Bahamas.

In a story in The Nassau Guardian on Wednesday the DNA leader admitted that he knew that his party’s MICAL candidate, Delano Munroe, was facing a criminal charge when Munroe was made a candidate by the party.  Munroe has been charged with stealing by reason of employment.

All individuals are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law in our country.  Munroe should be allowed to defend his name in court and should not be in frontline politics while this matter is pending.  McCartney should know this.  He is an attorney, a MP and a party leader.

“We are looking into it and we will make a statement once we have looked into it further,” said McCartney on Wednesday.

He said the party will determine the future of Munroe’s candidacy pending the investigation and the eventual outcome of the court case.

Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and Opposition Leader Perry Christie have been in the House of Assembly since 1977.  They have been MPs for parts of five different decades.  A component of McCartney’s appeal to some voters is that he is a ‘fresh face’.

The major criticism of McCartney, however, is that he does not have the experience to be prime minister.  Consequently, those who are considering voting for his fledgling party are evaluating all of his decisions to determine if this criticism is true or not.  Selecting and keeping Munroe as a candidate does not engender trust among these potential supporters of the DNA.

Running candidates with complicated lives can cost votes.  In the 2007 general election the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) ran Shane Gibson after embarrassing pictures of Gibson and Anna Nicole Smith in an embrace were published in The Tribune.  Gibson won his Golden Gates seat, but the PLP lost the election.

The Free National Movement (FNM) has continued to attack Gibson since 2007 on his record as the minister of housing in the last PLP administration, questioning his administration of the affairs of the ministry.  Yet, the PLP has nominated Gibson again to be a candidate in the 2012 general election.

Reasonable observers would agree that the Anna Nicole photos caused the PLP great embarrassment and votes.  The PLP, for some reason, sticks with Gibson.  We are not saying that he did anything wrong.  In politics some people simply become liabilities because of negative voter perception of the issues they face.  Leaders who cannot ensure that these individuals serve from behind-the-scenes, or not at all, demonstrate that they are either not strong enough to make this happen or that they are out of touch with the public mood.

McCartney has made a mistake.  He should inform Munroe that he should take a break from the frontline until the matter is resolved.  If cleared of the charge, Munroe would be able to reenter frontline politics and state his case as a potential political candidate.

Jan 27, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Whitney Bastian says he was denied a nomination to run on the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) ticket in South Andros because some members of the organization were afraid that party leader - Branville McCartney would not win his Bamboo Town seat... and if Mr Bastian won in South Andros, he would become leader of Branville McCartney's party

BASTIAN BLASTS BRAN IN DNA ROW



By SANCHESKA BROWN
Tribune Staff Reporter
sbrown@tribunemedia.net



BAMBOO Town MP Branville McCartney appointed himself leader of the DNA despite suggestions that he was elected internally, former party member Whitney Bastian has claimed.

In an interview with The Tribune, Mr Bastian said he cannot accept the official story of how Mr McCartney became leader of the party - because it was he, Mr Bastian, who had made up that story in the first place.

He said: "I advised them to tell to people the elections were over, when the truth is there were no elections. He appointed himself leader.

"When we had a meeting with potential members, we told them there was an election and the leader post was taken, but that was not true," he said.

"I dare him to say otherwise. He knows he appointed himself. If he says he didn't, let him produce the minutes of this so-called meeting where he was elected. Where was it? When was it? Who was there?

"He couldn't tell you because there was no election."

Mr Bastian said he originally planned not to say anything, but because Mr McCartney refuses to acknowledge that the former South Andros MP helped start the party, he feels compelled to speak out.

"I did not want people to think just because I did not get the nomination I was bitter and was making up things about Mr McCartney.

"I was just going to let him get beat up from the PLP and the FNM, but he started this so I'll finish it.

"He is still a novice in politics and he still has a lot to learn.

"He seems to forget I went to the Parliamentary Commissioner to negotiate on behalf of the DNA to use the lighthouse as the symbol for DNA. I didn't do that as a potential candidate, I did that as a partner.

"He seems to forget I encouraged him to leave the FNM. I told him if he didn't the Prime Minister would chap him at the knee and kill him politically."

Mr Bastian said he was going to form a party on his own, but Mr McCartney asked him to wait.

"We both decided that he would leave the FNM when the BTC issue came up. When I went to Panama, he called me and told me he couldn't wait until then. I told him I would support him in whatever he decided. After that we began working on the DNA and having long meetings. He constantly asked my advice and I have emails to the effect.

"Did he do that with every potential candidate? No, he didn't," Mr Bastian replied.

On Monday, Mr McCartney denied he started the DNA with Mr Bastian. In fact, he said, if Mr Bastian really did help form the DNA, he would have never been denied a nomination to run on the DNA ticket in South Andros.

In response, Mr Bastian said he was denied because some members of the party were afraid Mr McCartney would not win his seat and if Mr Bastian won, he would become leader of the party.

Mr Bastian said he still considers Mr McCartney to be "a brother," but said he could let his involvement in the DNA be misrepresented.

Mr Bastian is now running in the South Andros constituency as an independent candidate.

Mr McCartney could not be reached for comment last night.

January 11, 2012

tribune242

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Branville McCartney and his Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party is not ready to govern The Bahamas

DNA not ready to govern


By Kevin Evans



I would like to comment on the ongoing saga surrounding the leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) and Member of Parliament for Bamboo Town, Branville McCartney.  While I commend the Bamboo Town MP for chiding his parliamentary colleagues for not disclosing their financial assets to the Public Disclosure Commission for the years 2009 and 2010, I take strong exception to him calling Opposition Leader Perry Christie a wimp and Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham a bully.

Both Ingraham and Christie have been in the House of Assembly since 1977.  At that time McCartney was probably just in primary school.  Ingraham and Christie have more than 68 years of combined experience in our parliamentary system.  Branville McCartney, on the other hand, has been in Parliament for only four-and-a-half years.  He served in Ingraham's Cabinet as minister of state for immigration.  He resigned from the Cabinet in early 2010 and he severed ties with the Free National Movement (FNM) earlier this year.

After McCartney left the FNM, he founded the DNA party.  The sudden formation of the DNA after McCartney's exodus from the governing party might very well be an indication that the Bamboo Town MP was planning all along to start his own political party; perhaps as early as 2010.

Remember, in early 2010 McCartney told a Nassau Guardian reporter that he had no intention of resigning from the FNM.  He also told the same reporter that he believed that the FNM was the best party for the country at that time.  So why the sudden change and what's this all about?


McCartney’s ambition

When he was introduced to the constituents of Bamboo Town as the FNM's standard bearer in 2007, or thereabouts, McCartney probably already had ambitions of becoming prime minister after only completing his first term as MP.  Never mind the senior FNM MPs who have faithfully toed the party line for years.  I never heard of Branville McCartney before 2007.  In fact, before 2007 I had never seen him before.  Ingraham ran him in a constituency that has been considered a safe seat for the FNM.  Had it not been for Ingraham, McCartney would not have been in the position he is in today.  Had McCartney ran as an independent candidate in 2007, he would have lost his election deposit.  The FNM has made him, politically speaking, what he is today.

Perhaps McCartney, in calling the prime minister a bully, was simply doing what all opposition parties are expected to do: Oppose the sitting government.  Or maybe the Bamboo Town MP was attempting to gain much-needed publicity.  As the saying goes: All publicity is good publicity.  When McCartney and the DNA came out of the blocks, they had momentum.  The party, however, has lost that momentum during the past few months. The DNA is losing its mojo and appeal.  This is why McCartney has fought hard to stay in the limelight.  Perhaps this can also explain why the Bamboo Town MP has sought to oppose the FNM government on almost every position it holds.  McCartney at times appears to be opposing the Ingraham administration just for the sake of opposing.

Is the public losing affection for McCartney?

Be that as it may, it is crucial that the DNA make the newspaper headlines every week if it wants to remain relevant to The Bahamian people.  The party simply does not have the clout of either the Progressive Liberal Party or the Free National Movement.  I believe that it was the prominent American journalist Margaret Carlson who once said that attention is a depreciating asset.  McCartney and his DNA party would do well to heed this warning.  Bahamians are always looking for the next new thing.  That is why so many Bahamians were euphoric over the initial unveiling of the DNA party.  But it now appears as if all the excitement has cooled down.

McCartney is obviously a very confident man.  He really believes that the Bahamian electorate will support him and his party in 2012.  There's a very thin line between confidence and arrogance, however.  That McCartney and his cadre of inexperienced DNA candidates would even dare to challenge the two most important political parties in Bahamian history tells me that they are biting off more than they can chew.  McCartney is asking The Bahamian electorate to entrust the nation to him and his team of candidates who have little to no experience at running a government.

I think that it would be more prudent for Bahamians to stick with either the FNM or the PLP.  Both of these parties have worked hard to build this nation since majority rule.  Besides, at least we know what we are getting in Ingraham and Christie.

McCartney hasn't even served out his first term as MP, yet he wants to be prime minister of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas.  Ingraham and Christie had been members of Parliament for many years before they became prime minister.  In fact, Christie had served an astounding 25 years before he became prime minister in 2002; Ingraham had served 15 years before he became this nation's chief executive in 1992; and Sir Lynden (Pindling) had served over 10 years before he became premier in 1967.  Furthermore, Ingraham was elected to his position as party leader during the FNM's convention in 2005.  On the other hand, the DNA has not yet held a convention.  In my humble opinion, the Bamboo Town MP is just too inexperienced for such an important position.

DNA government would harm country

I am afraid that if the DNA wins the 2012 general election, the party might very well end up running this country aground.  With all due respect to McCartney and the DNA, I don't believe that they are ready to govern The Bahamas.

Being a successful business person does not mean you are ready to sit around the cabinet table and make decisions that will impact the lives of over 330,000 Bahamians.  Managing a grocery store or a laundromat is way different from managing a country.

Handling the finances of a law firm is not the same as handling the finances of a nation.

Right now the DNA candidates are way out of their league.  The candidates are way in over their heads, with all due respect to them.  Maybe it would be best if the DNA candidates all get involved with local government.

They could gain much valuable experience at the local government level before attempting to get into the big leagues.

Oct 21, 2011

thenassauguardian

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Branville McCartney - Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader fails at convincing me that he truly understands the challenges and limits imposed on those who are governing The Bahamas... or worse yet, he doesn’t care about reality; he wants to sell us fantasies

Gone Green? Part 2

By Ian G. Strachan

“The DNA is here to create the same paradise for Bahamians that only tourists and foreigners seem to enjoy. The DNA is here to encourage you to dream beyond your wildest imagination; we are here to dare you to think the unthinkable, to do the impossible.”  -Branville McCartney’s address at the launch of the Democratic National Alliance, May 12, 2011

 
This week we continue our discussion of the career of  Branville McCartney, Member for Bamboo Town and leader of the Democratic National Alliance.

McCartney’s departure from Ingraham’s Cabinet seemed impulsive to me, poorly thought out.  His explanations weren’t very convincing.  I wasn’t convinced that he had a serious philosophical difficulty with the FNM (Free National Movement) and I wasn’t clear what he meant when he said he wasn’t being utilized fully.

His promise to challenge for the leadership of the FNM was bold and refreshing, yes, but ultimately foolish, since you ought never to tell a man like Ingraham that you are coming for him.  You just come for him.  Even if he had the opportunity he wanted to challenge Ingraham at convention, I seriously doubt he would have met a fate that was any different from the one meted out to Paul Moss, someone with a better political mind in my opinion than McCartney.

Since launching the DNA, McCartney’s remarks have simply confirmed my impression that he is playing a game and if he wins, we may lose.  What really is the difference, in terms of philosophy and vision, between the FNM and the DNA?  The PLP and the DNA?  Why does the DNA exist—outside of the fact that Ingraham refuses to leave the FNM and let McCartney lead?

And the DNA leader fails at convincing me that he truly understands the challenges and limits imposed on those who are governing this country—or worse yet, he doesn’t care about reality; he wants to sell us fantasies.  Witness these remarks from his maiden speech as DNA leader: “Imagine sidewalk cafes, well-lit streets, rows of theaters especially designed for young Bahamian playwrights, and a downtown that is world renowned and envied by the rest of the world, with Bahamian art and craft galore! . . . Imagine a Bahamas where citizens are no longer prisoners in their homes; where burglar bars are not a necessity . . .  Imagine a tertiary institution that attracts students from around the world and joins the top ranks of colleges and universities around the world. Imagine a Bahamian Harvard. Imagine these possibilities! . . . If we put people first, then perhaps we would no longer boast a national grade point average of a D that has made the outside world question our brilliance and our intelligence.  If we put people first, perhaps it will move to an A that will once again make us the respected and competitive, intellectually brilliant nation that we were meant to be and that many expect us to be; not only regionally but globally.”

I’ve said this before: the language, the tool of the “lotioner” is hyperbole.  PLP leader Perry Christie and McCartney specialize in exaggeration and overblown rhetoric.  Ingraham, the bulldog, specializes in red herrings, the tactic of distraction.  COB a Bahamian Harvard?  Harvard has a $32 billion endowment.  The Bahamas’ budgeted expenditure this year is $1.9 billion.  No more burglar bars in Nassau?  Really? The DNA will deliver that?  The city of Nassau will be envied by the world?  A model city, sure, but envied?  By the world?  The Bahamas will have an A average in its schools?  Really?  Every student will have an A average?  Christie couldn’t have done a better job at painting pies in the sky.

Then McCartney proposed that the country deny children born to illegals the right to apply for citizenship—ever.  This is a reckless and foolhardy proposition.  Rather than ensure the nation’s security it would undoubtedly endanger it.  McCartney is gambling here: demagoguing really.  Trying to capitalize on fear and paranoia.  Dividing us instead of uniting us.  All Bahamians of Haitian descent, Jamaican descent, all Bahamians whose parents or grandparents, out of desperation, came here illegally should note well and vote accordingly.  I for one will not vote for a party that proposes something so destructive and inhumane.  Yes, we must guard our borders, yes we must work toward a system of legal Haitian migration for purposes of employment, but I don’t see how dooming children to statelessness creates a better Bahamas.

McCartney then accused the FNM of being in the pocket of the Chinese and challenged them to reveal who financed them.  He himself refused to reveal who was financing the DNA. How does that make sense?  How is that a new political approach?  If you are going to demand that people be transparent, shouldn’t you first be transparent yourself?  Otherwise you are just like all the rest – playing the game.

And recently, he criticized Ingraham for not running in Bamboo Town and sending Cassius Stuart instead.  Was he serious or was this a bad joke?  Why on earth should Ingraham run in Bamboo Town?  Will McCartney run in North Abaco?  Does he imagine he will win in North Abaco?

I am not convinced that McCartney is experienced enough, thoughtful enough, skilled enough to lead this country at this time.  What I see is someone who too often is shallow, a “lotioner”, someone posing as firm, determined, and possessing a vision.

When I mention McCartney’s weaknesses to DNA insiders they tell me it’s a team effort.  But McCartney wants to be prime minister, the most powerful office in the land and I just don’t trust his judgment.  I have some serious doubts about the competence of some of the people he has entrusted with major responsibilities in his party.

And I think he moved too soon.  And moving too soon tells me one of two things: either you really don’t understand how politics works in this country or you have a monumentally over blown sense of your political capital.

He has certain qualities that make him an excellent candidate--until he actually speaks. And when he speaks he either utters facile nothings or he reveals a willingness to say anything to gain an advantage.  That makes him at best reckless and at worst desperate.

But I may be wrong.  I probably don’t speak for the majority of Bahamians.  We know what an empty talking PM looks like.  We also know what headstrong leadership without vision looks like.  We want better.  I know there is a yearning for change in Bahamians of all generations.  We want and need inspiring leadership.  Strong, innovative, competent leadership.  I just don’t think McCartney and the DNA are what we want them so desperately to be.  Nonetheless, the DNA will probably gain more votes than any third party in the last 20 years.

People have to choose the better of three unpalatable options in this election.  And it ain’t gonna be pretty.  Is it better to go with the devil you know or the one you don’t?  Certainly, the PLP and FNM have themselves to blame for a lot of what they will suffer in 2012, because they refuse to renew themselves, despite the people’s yearning for rebirth.

Now, there’s another possibility: I may be dead wrong in accusing McCartney of delusions of grandeur.  McCartney may well know the DNA can’t win it all (I don’t think he’ll even win his seat in Bamboo Town). But he may be gaining immense pleasure from knowing he’s going to give Christie and Ingraham fits.  He may also have concluded that he has nothing to lose and that by losing in 2012 as head of the DNA he sets himself ahead of anyone else who may be aspiring to lead the PLP or FNM in 2017. And that would make him a lot more savvy a politician than I have given him credit for being.

Oct 17, 2011

Gone Green? - Part 1

thenassauguardian

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Most Bahamian voters do not view Branville McCartney as a credible prime minister... not to mention his announced Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party candidates... Voters know too that the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Free National Movement (FNM) are bigger than Perry Christie and Hubert Ingraham

McCartney’s Vanity Fair


Front Porch

By Simon



Halloween arrived early at the House of Assembly last week.  It made a sneak preview during the debate on establishing a Straw Market Authority.  In his debate wrap-up, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham spooked Branville McCartney by lobbing a few political ‘trick-or-treats’ at the DNA leader.

They were offered in a trademark Ingraham jest, often crafted to rattle opponents by delivering a serious message guised as humor.  So effective were the barbs that McCartney’s tough-guy mask slipped, sending him into a dizzying array of costume changes.

The MP for Bamboo Town reacted as a cry-baby and as a victim and martyr before trying to steady himself and regain his tough-guy persona.  He even donned his maximum leader costume by imperially declaring: “The good thing about being leader of this party is that I can determine where I can run.”

For his reference, Sir Lynden Pindling, who enjoyed a safe seat in New Providence prior to the 1967 general election, was persuaded by some of his colleagues to run in South Andros.  It proved pivotal in ushering in majority rule.

McCartney made no mention of a selection process for candidates at the branch or national level of the DNA. Instead he flatly stated that he will run wherever he pleases, possibly leaving Bamboo Town for North Abaco to teach Hubert Ingraham a lesson.

 

Singular

He floated the possibility with little respect for the people of either constituency. He also did not seem to consult with his party. Not even Sir Lynden, much less Hubert Ingraham, would claim such a singular privilege.

One must presume that McCartney is also prepared to remove an already nominated candidate from a constituency and run there if it suits his fancy.  If this is how McCartney thinks based on the power he has in the DNA, one can imagine how he might behave given real power.

Both Sir Lynden and Ingraham understood that ours is a parliamentary democracy where the party and cabinet take precedence.  We do not have a presidential system, which McCartney still seems not to understand despite his pretensions of collegiality.

When the current heads of the PLP and FNM are no longer the leaders of their parties, there will be others waiting to succeed them, who their respective party colleagues view as possible prime ministers.  McCartney confirmed this by noting that he sees potential successors to the major party leaders within their respective parties.

The same cannot be said of the DNA.  Most voters do not view McCartney as a credible prime minister, not to mention his announced candidates.  Voters know too that the PLP and FNM are bigger than Christie and Ingraham.

Smarting from a bruised ego and piqued at Ingraham’s playful ribbing, McCartney, in his martyr costume, issued a highly unlikely and amateurish bluff.  All laughing aside, he suggested he might risk his political career by switching to North Abaco to teach Hubert Ingraham a lesson.

In saying that he is prepared to lose there to deny Ingraham a victory and tilt it to the PLP, McCartney confirmed the gist of what the prime minister stated in the House, riling the DNA in the first place.

 

Judgement

It is that in Bamboo Town, as across the country, the DNA is unlikely to win against the major parties.  Whatever his capacity for irony, the paucity of the DNA leader’s judgement is remarkable.  Leadership is not mostly about skill-sets.  It is about good judgement.

In even floating the idea that he might out of animus run against the Member for North Abaco is not the type of poor judgement a more seasoned leader would make.   Essentially it is vanity, not good judgement, that led the DNA leader to brag that “as leader of this party” he can run wherever he wants.

It is this unquenchable vanity that provoked the Member for Bamboo Town to overreact to the prime minister’s jocularity in the House, which drew thunderous laughter.

The over-the-top response to Ingraham’s mild tap-up speaks volumes about how the DNA and its leader must see themselves: They are special and precious and should be treated with kid gloves.  How dare anyone criticize them seeing how special they are?

Never mind that month after month, McCartney and his party have relentlessly attacked Hubert Ingraham in even more pointed and barbed language, eliciting no response from Ingraham despite the constant attacks.

McCartney suggested that Ingraham is uncaring and lacks compassion.  He accused a man who dedicated his life to improving the quality of life for Bahamians as basically being unpatriotic, unconcerned about protecting Bahamian interests.  McCartney continues to question the prime minister’s integrity and the DNA has called him all manner of things – child of God is not one of them.

Apparently it is perfectly okay for Ingraham to be the DNA’s punching bag.  Yet when he ever so slightly slapped back, which was much milder than a punch, the DNA and its leader doubled-over playing the wounded victims.  Rather than the rough and tumble nature of politics, they may consider competing in ballroom dancing.

Politics is not a Vanity Fair for those who believe that the world should recognize and reward the supposed brilliance they see when they look in the mirror every morning and tell themselves how wonderful they are among other mortals.

 

Privilege

Politics is a noble art and vocation.  It is an arena where those who dare to compete for the privilege of office, do so through the ideas, character and skills they may bring to the tough task of governance, as individuals and as a party.

Among the tests for being afforded such a privilege are those of resilience, imagination, and organizational prowess.  Luck and timing are often pivotal for political success.  But, as the saying reminds, “Chance favors the prepared mind”.

Patronage too plays a role.  Ingraham convinced the FNM constituency association of Bamboo Town to accept McCartney as the candidate for the traditionally safe seat for that party.  He also appointed the freshman MP a junior minister in the two high-profile areas of tourism and immigration.

Clearly, this was not enough for the preternaturally ambitious politician who seemed miffed that other junior ministers were given substantive posts ahead of him.  In exiting the Ingraham administration he bemoaned that he felt stifled, that his gifts were not fully utilized.  This, after only approximately three years in cabinet.

Suppose Ingraham had appointed McCartney to a substantive ministerial post?  Suppose that Ingraham indicated to the junior minister that he saw him as a potential successor?  What is the likelihood that he would have left so abruptly?

Others in leadership in the DNA might ponder those questions.  And, this:  Did Branville McCartney launch the DNA to bring about change in the political process or primarily as a vehicle to accommodate his overweening ambition?

Moreover, if the FNM is re-elected and Ingraham invites McCartney back to a substantive cabinet post and indicates that he may be a possible successor, what is the likelihood that he would remain in a defeated DNA?

 

Obsession

Vanity is a blinding obsession.  The real test of one’s genetic make-up as a politician is how one reacts in the face of real power.  How McCartney might react if he eyed a rapid path to the top of the FNM in its last term or possible next term is where his artifice and profiling would likely give way to realpolitik.

Since the launch of his DNA, McCartney has tried his hand at the classic strategy of triangulation.  It was clever to do so given voter frustration over various issues, including the persistent global economic crisis and the resulting desire to blame and punish someone or some group for their woes.

The DNA also tapped into the ever-present hunger of voters as consumers for the next new thing or personality.  Bahamians also like a good show.  But, most independent voters, critical in the next election, require more substance than the DNA has provided in terms of leadership and policy.

The DNA leader’s meager contribution to the Straw Market Authority debate was the latest example of his preference for profiling given his seeming discomfort with substantive policy discussions.

With his trademark studied gestures and little room for triangulation, McCartney spoke during the debate as if he were a reporter and not a parliamentarian.  He commented on what the FNM and PLP said about the bill in question but, as usual, added little by way of insight or substance to the debate.

Sensing an opportunity for scoring a cheap political point, McCartney regurgitated the manufactured news item about a regulation concerning hygiene in the straw market.  The underlying premise of the story was subsequently shot down by the prime minister.

The halls of Parliament are where political careers advance, stagnate or flounder.  Given a prepared text or a staged-event, McCartney performs adequately.  Yet given the opportunity to think on his feet and demonstrate his political mettle on the floor of the House, he failed to rise to the occasion.  Worse, he proved unready, not prepared for the big leagues.

It proved Ingraham’s point about McCartney still being in the junior leagues.  The contest in Bamboo Town thrusts three young men who led their own parties into a contest to see who may someday have the opportunity to contest for the chairs in which both Hubert Ingraham and Perry Christie have sat.  But first, they have to win in Bamboo Town.

frontporchguardian@gmail.com

www.bahamapundit.com

Oct 18, 2011

thenassauguardian

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Renward Wells; the PLP candidate, and Cassius Stuart; the FNM candidate, both said Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader Branville McCartney has no chance of retaining his Bamboo Town seat in the 2012 general election

RIVALS SAY THEY DO NOT FEAR RISK OF LOSING TO DNA


By SANCHESKA BROWN
Tribune Staff Reporter
sbrown@tribunemedia.net


THE PROGRESSIVE Liberal Party and Free National Movement candidates for Bamboo Town said they are not concerned about the possibility of losing to incumbent, Branville McCartney.

When asked what they thought their chances were in Bamboo Town, Renward Wells, the PLP candidate, and Cassius Stuart, the FNM candidate, both said DNA leader Mr McCartney has no chance of retaining his seat.

Mr Wells said: "I don't think its going to be a close race at all. In fact, I am going to win by more than 50 per cent of the vote. Mr McCartney will be pleasantly surprised.

"I know Bamboo Town has been FNM since 1987 but that was because of Tennyson Wells. Mr Wells convinced them that FNM was the better party and now I will convince them that PLP is the way to go.

"Cassius Stuart is my biggest competition, we are both cut from the same cloth. Mr McCartney will be easy to beat."

Mr Stuart agreed that Mr McCartney is no competition and said he won't even get one per cent of the vote.

"Everyone who stood with Mr McCartney now stands with me. He has some support but it is nothing significant," he said.

"The people are tired of persons being elected on the FNM ticket then abandoning them for their own personal interests.

"They always knew Mr McCartney had an ulterior motive because he painted his constituency office green and not red.

"I am going to knock Bran out. The only running he'll be doing is out of Bamboo Town."

The comments from both men came after Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said Bamboo Town is a "test case" to see which one of the men will emerge as the winner.

He said: "I have taken two gentlemen who wanted to be leaders and put them up as candidates.

"There is another member there, in the person of the Member of Parliament for Bamboo Town, who wants to be a leader."

He added: "We have asked them to fight in their league down there to see which one of them is eligible to be leader. You have to win first."

For his part, Mr McCartney said the fact that the three men, two of whom were at one point leaders of third parties, are running in the same constituency is no coincidence.

He said: "The whole thing is a ploy for Mr Ingraham and Mr Christie to get Renward Wells and Cassius Stuart out of the way to stop them from joining forces.

"They planned this whole thing from the beginning to put us against each other."

The prime minister has indicated that he will not cut the boundaries of Bamboo Town - even if the Boundaries Commission recommends it.

October 12, 2011

tribune242

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

It will be difficult for Branville McCartney's Democratic National Alliance (DNA) to win the next general election... The country has been locked in a political duopoly for some time... The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and the Free National Movement (FNM) are the only parties many would consider voting for

Pondering third party success

thenassauguardian editorial


We are nearing our next general election. Thus far the opposition parties have been active agitating and campaigning. The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is attempting to make a mark its first time out. From his public proclamations, DNA leader Branville McCartney thinks he has a real shot at being the next prime minister of The Bahamas.

It will be difficult for McCartney to win. The country has been locked in a political duopoly for some time. The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and the Free National Movement (FNM) are the only parties many would consider voting for.

It is necessary, though, to explore the options if by some magic the DNA does well.

There are currently 41 seats in the House of Assembly. A party would need to win at least 21 seats to have a majority government. If the DNA wins a chunk of seats along with the two main parties, other type of governments would have to be considered.

Most Bahamians are familiar with coalition governance – as currently exists in the United Kingdom. Under this form of government parties with seats come together to form a majority government with the party or parties with fewer seats receiving a negotiated number of cabinet posts and other appointed posts in exchange for adding support to the main party or group of parties.

Assuming the PLP and FNM have more seats, McCartney would be courted aggressively and offered the world by each party for his support.

The other possibility would be for a minority government to be formed. In this scenario one of the parties that won a large number of seats, but not a majority, would have to convince the governor general that it could govern. The convention usually is that the party with the largest number of seats without a majority gets the first chance to form a minority government.

What then happens is that the minority government has to govern by consensus. At each confidence vote in the elected chamber of the Parliament, that government could be defeated because the combined opposition would have a majority. However, minority governments make accommodations on each confidence bill, ensuring that enough of the opposition supports the measure. This prevents the government from being toppled.

Negotiation is crucial in minority government situations. These government, though, are unstable and usually short-lived. In Canada minority governments last on average around a year and a half. Canada had minority governments from 2004 up to earlier this year when the Conservative Party won a majority.

If the DNA can win some seats, McCartney will have some tough choices to make. In such a situation it would probably be wise for him not to align himself with either of the two old parties. If many Bahamians take the leap of faith and ‘go green’ at the next general election all of the followers who wanted to vote for the DNA, but were too scared to, would likely come on board at the following election.

Getting into bed with the PLP or FNM would damage McCartney’s message. How could he be different or represent change by either returning to Hubert Ingraham or embracing Perry Christie?

If the people support this third party in any meaningful way Bahamian politics will be forever changed. McCartney does not need to come anywhere near to a majority to become, at least for a few days, the most powerful man in the country.

Aug 15, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

The more Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader Branville McCartney speaks, the more the Bahamian public learns about his poorly conceived ideas... the quicker the loss of potential support for the DNA Party

Branville McCartney and the question of experience

Front Porch

BY SIMON



DNA Leader Branville McCartney has ensnared himself in a classic conundrum that severely limits the viability of certain politicians: The more he speaks, the more the general public learns about his poorly conceived ideas, the quicker the loss of potential support. Sarah Palin is a typical example of this phenomenon.

Mrs. Palin still excites her base. But among other voters including independents there is a ceiling she has proven incapable of breaking, mostly because the majority of voters find her persona, politics and policy prescriptions unappealing. They cannot envision her as president of the United States.

The razzmatazz and hoopla surrounding various DNA launches, publicity exercises and media curiosity is diminishing, with an increasing number of potential voters jolted by many of Mr. McCartney’s statements and calling into question his credibility, substance and critical thinking abilities. It is highly unlikely that most Bahamians view him as a potential prime minister.

As long as she is not formally running for president, Mrs. Palin can continue to just tweet her way into the hearts of her more ardent supporters and carefully select her media appearances. Mr. McCartney does not have this luxury. While some in the media have given a number of his bizarre statements a pass, this is beginning to change. He is now coming under greater reportorial and editorial scrutiny.

XENOPHOBIC

Mr. McCartney has pandered to xenophobic hysteria, claimed that God has chosen him, made curious statements about marijuana smoking by voters during a by-election, proposed a constitutional change barring children born to illegal immigrants from access to applying for citizenship, and made wild charges with no evidence about political donations by a foreign government, among other public relations fireworks.

Asked if he would disclose his donors as a part of his promise of campaign financing, Mr. McCartney turned the hypocrite in record speed. Given an opportunity to act boldly rather than just offer glib talk, the DNA leader refused to become the brand of change in which he wants us to believe. The man who said he was different did not demonstrate the courage of his purported convictions.

The question voters have of any new party is: Is it a credible alternative? This speaks to the question of experience which is measured not only by time in politics and government, though time served is of considerable importance in every field from journalism and business to teaching and medicine.

Poor analogies are typically a sign of faulty reasoning and poor thinking. About two weeks ago the Bamboo Town MP suggested to Jeffrey Lloyd, host of “Jeffrey” on Star 105.6 FM, that the Bahamian people are the board of directors of the country, responsible for hiring and firing the nation’s chief executive.

The analogy is revealing of Mr. McCartney’s mindset. It is a brittle analogy. A country is essentially not like a corporation. While various qualities associated with business should be practised by government, the major purpose and various goals of the two are significantly different.

Leaving this aside, the Bahamian people are more like shareholders with the Cabinet being the board of directors. Ours is a parliamentary democracy with collective responsibility. Mr. McCartney seems to be running for president evincing in his public rhetoric a misunderstanding or purposeful ignorance of our system.

MISPERCEPTIONS

It would be a good civic deed were Mr. McCartney to help educate voters rather than pandering to general misperceptions. The constitution does not place executive authority in the hands of a single chief executive. The authority is placed into the collective hands of a cabinet.

Article 72 of the Bahamas Constitution provides that the Cabinet “shall have the general direction and control of the government of The Bahamas and shall be collectively responsible to Parliament”.

When the former minister recently thumped his chest on various immigration matters he claims he attempted to advance when he was in the Cabinet, he might have noted that the position taken by any minister on a particular matter before Cabinet is not to be revealed publicly. Further, ministers don’t make policy on an individual basis. That is the prerogative of the Cabinet.

For someone who boasts that he would have more total cabinet experience than Sir Lynden Pindling and Hubert Ingraham combined were he ever to assume the prime ministership, Mr. McCartney’s pronouncements on how our system works suggests a combination of studied and self-serving ignorance or just plain ignorance.

Like some, he is fixated on the personalities of Messrs Ingraham and Christie, who in all likelihood are entering their last electoral contest as leaders of their respective parties; which undercuts a significant part of the rationale for the DNA.

By no stretch of the imagination does Branville McCartney even remotely possess the leadership qualities of a Lynden Pindling or a Hubert Ingraham. Both men would run wide circles around him even if they had no cabinet experience and he had a lifetime in cabinet. They were battle-tested over many years with significant party and parliamentary experience before becoming prime minister.

Even so, had Sir Lynden been older and more mature before becoming premier he may not have succumbed to some of the temptations of power which brought harm to the country as well as to his legacy.

In our system, a potential prime minister is elected along with men and women who can form a government and are of such a calibre that voters view them as a credible government. In 1967 Sir Lynden had a deep bench with the likes of the great Sir Milo Butler, Arthur Hanna, Cecil Wallace Whitfield, Arthur Foulkes, Carlton Francis and Jeffrey Thompson among others.

Moreover, the PLP had been in existence since 1953 with thinkers and strategists immersed in the study of government and policy, and widely travelled in the interest of learning about party politics and parliamentary democracy. They were a part of a movement for majority rule which had matured through many years of struggle with experience forged in fire and a deep sense of history.

EXPERIENCED

In 1992, Hubert Ingraham led an FNM with two decades of experience as a party, seasoned politicians and mature and wise men and women as well as relative newcomers ready to form a government.

Sarah Palin repeatedly boasted she had more executive experience than Barack Obama. That assertion, similar to Mr. McCartney’s experience claim, requires no further comment. After his election, President Obama chose an impressive cabinet team with wide government and other experience.

In comparison to Messrs. Pindling, Ingraham and Obama, what will Mr. McCartney’s team look like and literally bring to the Cabinet table? For someone who is boasting of having had a few years in cabinet as a selling point, that his DNA has been in existence for less than a year contradicts his own logic.

Most of the DNA’s candidates are undoubtedly well-meaning people who love their country. With about half of its candidates nominated, voters have some idea of potential cabinet members and therefore legitimate questions about those who would serve in a McCartney-led cabinet.

Just as most voters appear not to see the DNA leader as prime minister, the view of his team as the Cabinet of The Bahamas is not credible to most voters.

Mr. McCartney noted during the “Jeffrey” interview that there are a good number of individuals in the PLP and FNM who may serve as prime minister. That claim cannot be seriously made of any of his announced candidates.

Recall Mr. McCartney’s corporate analogy about Bahamians hiring a chief executive to run the country? Any company that hires an untested CEO or a cadre of lower level to junior executives or an inexperienced board of directors would lose market credibility and stock value, not to mention incite a shareholder revolt.

Yet, Mr. McCartney proposes that the management and direction of the highly valued Bahamas Incorporated be turned over to a group of amateurs with no deep bench, no longstanding organizational experience as a political party nor a leader with the type of experience and ability that counts, including superior judgement and intellectual depth as well as credibility and maturity.

The vast majority of Bahamian voters, whether they are metaphorically viewed as members of a board of directors or as shareholders, are unlikely to approve such an initial public offering.

frontporchguardian@gmail.com

bahamapundit.com

Aug 09, 2011

thenassauguardian

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Branville McCartney, leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) says: ...REPEATED efforts to address The Bahamas' immigration problems were "blocked" by "the man himself", Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham

Bran: why I quit my job at immigration



BY NOELLE NICOLLS
Tribune Staff Reporter
tribune242
nnicolls@tribunemedia.net



REPEATED efforts to address the country's immigration problems were "blocked" by "the man himself", Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, claimed Branville McCartney, leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA).

Mr McCartney said he resigned as Minister of State for Immigration after Prime Minister Ingraham told him on "repeated" occasions that his efforts amounted to "grand-standing."

Mr Ingraham could not be reached for comment.

"When I resigned I said my hands are tied. We are being stagnated. My hands are tied. Those are the words I used. When you have persons telling you, 'no one told you to do this'; 'you did not get my permission to do that'. When you have persons ahead of you telling you that, what are you to do?" Mr McCartney asked.

"We do not have the political will to deal with this illegal immigration problem. We can deal with it, but we just need the political will. We won't eradicate it totally, but we can bring it down to a manageable level. The Free National Movement (FNM) does not have the political will to deal with it for some reason. Every time I tried to do things there was a problem," he said.

Mr McCartney said he had three key initiatives that were not supported in the FNM Cabinet. One initiative was a recommendation to amend the Immigration Act to make it an offence for Bahamians to "harbour illegals."

This amendment, he said, would place a greater burden of responsibility on land owners and landlords, as well as employers if they rented or leased to and employed illegal immigrants.

"That was something I had put forward and it was dismissed. That is not an offence in the Bahamas. I tried to put it by way of an amendment, but it was dismissed. The political will was not there. At the end of the day nothing came out of it," said Mr McCartney.

Asked if the amendment would open the way for discriminatory practices like Arizona-style profiling, Mr McCartney said, "No man."

"What is discriminatory if I say, I am not going to rent to you because you are here illegally. If you have a lease agreement, you can have that in there. You ought to confirm the status of your tenant. It is not discriminatory. I do not see how that comes into play. You ought to be in a position to say, 'Look, the law says I can be fined if I rent to someone illegally.' The onus ought to be on the landlords to make sure whoever they rent to is here legally," said Mr McCartney.

During his tenure at immigration, Mr McCartney said he also started a special unit to deal specifically with the problem of "shanty towns." The unit was cross-departmental, including representatives from the Ministry of Housing, the Attorney General's Office, Ministry of Works and the Ministry of Social Services, among others.

The unit was operational for under a year, leading up to Mr McCartney's resignation. During its time of operation, Mr McCartney said, he was "catching a lot of hell for it."

"The fact of the matter is, we started going into these shanty towns from a legal and humane basis, and we started the process of dealing with the elimination of these shanty towns. And then I was told I was grandstanding. My hands were tied. I subsequently resigned," said Mr McCartney.

At every step of the way, Mr McCartney said he met up "against a brick wall." It was no different, he said, when he launched a programme called "immigration watch" in 2009.

Although it was designed for implementation across the country, the programme targeted the southern end of New Providence, particularly the Marshall Road area, according to Mr McCartney, because that is where "a lot of boats come in."

Immigration watch was set up similar to a crime watch. Community members would assist the law enforcement agencies by participating in an "immigration watch." They would call the government agencies if they heard about illegal activity, or spotted incoming ships they believed were suspicious looking.

Mr McCartney said he was told "that is not a policy of the FNM and why am I doing that. I shortly after resigned. Everything I tried to do, they did not have the political will."

"I am not talking about doing it in an inhumane way. I am talking about doing it right. I am not talking about being discriminatory. I am talking about doing it right. Over and repeatedly I was told from the man himself that I was grand standing," said Mr McCartney.

July 20, 2011

tribune242

Saturday, July 16, 2011

Brent Symonette says comments made by Branville McCartney - leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), about "clandestine operations" at the Department of Immigration were "irresponsible"

DPM: Bran's comments were 'irresponsible'


By NOELLE NICOLLS
Tribune Staff Reporter
tribune242
nnicolls@tribunemedia.net



GOVERNMENT officials are refuting claims made by the Democratic National Alliance about "clandestine operations" at the Department of Immigration.

Acting Prime Minister Brent Symonette said comments made by Branville McCartney, leader of the DNA, were "irresponsible."

Mr McCartney, a former minister of state for immigration, claimed that "disgruntled employees" in his former office told his party that around 2,000 illegal immigrants are to be "secretly" regularised as Bahamian citizens.

However, Mr Symonette told The Tribune this could not be further from the truth.

He said citizenship applications are being processed based on the same procedures used by Mr McCartney during his time at the ministry, although much of the process has since been digitised.

Applicants go through a detailed vetting process, where they are usually required to produce birth certificates, health records and school records. They are required to participate in interviews, usually several.

Ultimately, the Cabinet, serving as the board of immigration, gives the final authorisation during a monthly immigration meeting, said Mr Symonette. The basic process is the same for citizenship and permanent residency applications, except in the case of spousal applications, which do not have to go to Cabinet.

"Nothing has changed in the process since Branville McCartney was minister of state. He did not change the process. I haven't changed his process. I met the process there before when I was minister in 1992. That is the process," said Mr Symonette.

"Any issue or question that it was done secretly, clandestinely, or whatever word, is totally irresponsible. I have outlined the process. The leader of the DNA made no attempt as a senior minister, as far as I am aware, to change that process. He met it there and he left it there," he said.

The only recent change that may be causing confusion for the DNA, Mr Symonette said, is a new initiative at the department aimed at processing some 1,300 applications for citizenship and permanent residency that have been catching dust for decades.

A special project team was employed to deal with these back-logged cases, while the permanent staff continues to process current applications.

As for the swearing in ceremony conducted for successful applicants, Mr Symonette said that ceremony is not public. It is attended by senior government officials and family members.

In New Providence, he said the ceremony takes place in the "swearing in room." In Grand Bahama, he said, it takes place in the Prime Minister's office, and in Abaco, he said, it takes place in a Marsh Harbour court house.

In all cases, Mr Symonette said, applicants seeking citizenship are required to demonstrate knowledge of the Bahamas, including the pledge of allegiance, national anthem and national symbols, during the interview stage.

He said there was a class covering this information started under McCartney's watch, but which "ceased while he was still minister of state."

"They were a one-morning issue. I don't want to give the impression you came in on Saturday for weeks," added Mr Symonette.

July 15, 2011

tribune242

Sunday, July 3, 2011

I would caution the young leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), Branville McCartney - to be very careful as he attempts to tap into the spiritual realm in moving forward. If you make a claim that “God is guiding”, the assumption will be that someone is following

McCartney "playing games with God"?

By Edward Hutcheson



In the “theology of life” it must be understood that God is in control of all outcomes, based on what He allows, what He hinders or what He causes. Many Bahamian politicians and political parties have always been convinced that God is on their side; especially if you check their church attendance leading up to an election. I would caution the young leader of the DNA to be very careful as he attempts to tap into the spiritual realm in moving forward. If you make a claim that “God is guiding”, the assumption will be that someone is following. Reactions in the spiritual realm are normal, but it is the responses that that are important; and those of us within a particular historical framework have always been at the front of the line when it comes to God and politics; and because of this cultural idiosyncrasy we have often seen ourselves as being “special”, but this is changing.

More than a half-century ago the language we are hearing would have been suitable, a political entity coming on the scene for the good a people who have been oppressed and let down, but in July 2011 there is a slight difference; the oppressors and the oppressed have a lot more in common.

When the PLP came on the scene more than a half-century ago, the reality of who God was and what he meant to the Bahamian people was clearly defined and it was a powerful force. The then leader of the PLP took on the persona of a modern day Moses. The slogan “All the Way”, was chosen from the book of Deuteronomy,” Remember how the LORD your God led you all the way in the desert these forty years”, 8:2. It was later re-phrased to “All the way the Lord shall lead us”. The history of the modern Bahamas reminds us that even a political party with such a strong religious component had serious challenges in allowing the Lord to lead them through the years. And the challenges came early, as the church leaders who had supported the party to its victory in 1967, were unable to dissuade the party or its leadership from going back on the promises they had made ( in church) on the gambling issue.

Even one of our greatest Bahamian sons, who was a member of the party and a Baptist minister, paid the ultimate price for standing on the issue of principle. Perhaps it just one of those co-incidences but exactly 40 years from its grand entry in 1967, the party finds itself in a political wilderness.

I would advise Mr. McCartney to be very careful of his utterances as his political career develops especially when he attempts to presume that God is on the side of Him and his party; God is on the side of those who are prepared to do His will. Politicians have a penchant for beginning with God and then using Him and His people when it is convenient. He should take a page from one his mentors, who is wise enough not to presume upon God’s goodness; he has even had to bear the brunt of some Bahamians not him seeing as Christian, when compared to some of the other political leaders who like to go to church on a regular basis. No matter what people say about his ex-leader, they will never be able to accuse him of “playing games with God”.

Saturday, July 02, 2011

weblogbahamas

Branville McCartney's speech at The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party's Grand Bahama launch, Freeport - Grand Bahama, Saturday July 2, 2011 at the Our Lucaya Resort

'Grand Bahama: A Dream Deferred No More' theme of DNA party launch on the island




Ladies and Gentlemen, young women and young men of this great island of Grand Bahama - and to all from around the Bahamas who are joining us here at the Our Lucaya Resort in Grand Bahama tonight, I want to say good night!


On Thursday, May 12th, at the initial launch of this immense movement that is now the Democratic National Alliance, we promised you, the people of Grand Bahama, that we would bring our message of hope and our vision for the future to you and ask you to join us on our mission to become the next government of the Bahamas. Well Grand Bahama, tonight the DNA is here!


As your government in waiting, we are officially here, asking you to join us - as agents of change - in rewriting Bahamian political history and the story of the way politics is done in the Bahamas.


But more importantly, for your enduring patience, good will and sacrifice over the past few years, we are also here tonight to pay tribute to you for the resilience that you have shown and continue to show, in the face of hardship and oppression. For almost a decade now, you have been bending, pulled down by daunting pressures and the heavy load of economic deprivation; but you have shown the whole Bahamas and the powers that be what true strength is all about; you have shown us all that you may bend, but you will not break!


Tonight, Grand Bahama, the DNA has come to your island to say to the people of Grand Bahama, from West End to Pine Ridge, from Lucaya to High Rock, from Eight Mile Rock to Marco City, that with your help and the help of God, we will not allow you to be broken either.


We want you to know that the DNA will prop you up, push you up, and help you to stand tall once again, so that you CAN become the beacon of light in the Northern Bahamas - the gateway to the Bahamas - that you were intended to be.


Grand Bahama, I am truly humbled beyond measure by your presence here this evening. When I came to your island a few weeks back to visit with the residents and a few of our prospective candidates, I had an opportunity to spend some time in the various constituencies and settlements, I was amazed, and saddened at the same time, at the repressive and depressive conditions that so many people are being forced to live under; notwithstanding the success that appears on the surface when you drive through the well paved streets and bright lights that illuminate government and private establishments in the downtown area. I found that it was not only the hard working, good people of West End, Pineridge, Marco City or Eight Mile Rock who were living in a state of oppression, but that it was also the good, hardworking people of Lucaya and High Rock who were suffering as well; I was overwhelmed by everyone just crying for help.


During my time here and even after I left, the only thing I could think of was "What happened to Grand Bahama?" What happened to the dream that was supposed to be Freeport and Grand Bahama? Did it just dry up like a raisin in the sun like Ralph Ellison asked in his "Dream Deferred," or did the dream simply just explode? I am convinced that the answer is no, and that is why I, along with the first nine candidates that were introduced last month; the nine that you will meet tonight, and the many others from all across our nation - both young and old - have taken up the cause of the DNA. No longer can we just sit back and allow the dreams of so many Bahamians to be deferred, to dry up, to explode; the time for change is now, and we MUST BE THAT CHANGE!


I believe that you are here tonight Grand Bahama because you, like many in our country, still believe in the Bahamian dream but you realize that things are going drastically wrong in our Bahama-land and that we, as a nation, are rapidly heading in the wrong direction. You and I are here tonight because we are sick and tired of being ostracized and marginalized from the governance of our country; we are here tonight because, as citizens, first class citizens who have been and are being treated like second class citizens, we are tired of being tolerated but not recognized. And when we are recognized, we are not tolerated.


The DNA and you, Grand Bahama, are here tonight because, collectively, we all realize that this Grand island, as its name implies - like almost every island in the Bahamas, for that matter - 38 years after Independence and over half a century since the signing of the Hawksbill Creek Agreement, this Grand island is still not the island of greatness that was envisioned at its inception.


Tonight we are gathered here simply because we know that for us to move closer to being the economically prosperous Bahamas that has been dangling before us for decades, the inevitable must happen; and, again, CHANGE MUST COME.


That change, however Grand Bahama, will only come when a new generation of people, and leaders with vision, united against and challenge - head on - the political status quo, who, for decades, has denied us, as a people, the right to have the semblance of power that independence promised; for decades, they tried to stifle us in our tracks at every turn.


Now, they may want you to believe that the present state of our economy and the condition of our people are to be blamed on some global recession, but do not allow yourselves to be fooled people; what we see taking place in the Bahamas today, including here in Grand Bahama, is not just a result of any global economic recession; it is the result of a visionary recession taking place in the leadership of our country; visionless leadership that still has yet to find ways to diversify our economy in such a way as to create a broad enough spectrum of opportunities to challenge all of the rich, creative talents, gifts, abilities, and intellectual ingenuity of our people.


For far too long, we have entrusted them with our lives, believing that they were men of vision. But Proverbs 29 and 18 says, where there is no vision, the people perish. And people of Grand Bahama, you know better than most, we in the Bahamas are beginning to perish at a tremendously fast rate.


We are perishing, Grand Bahamians, because successive governments have failed us miserably. After 44 years of back and forth volleying and vain talks, neither has yet to put in place any broad-based programs to grow our economy; nor have they created or presented any concrete, long term financial development plan that will help reduce the 4.2 billion dollar debt that they got us into, only to have it hang over our heads, our children's heads, and the heads of our children's children. Again, I say they have no sustainable vision for moving this country forward into any century, 21st or otherwise. They never had and they never will.


I think it is safe to say that the state of despair and degradation that many of us are suffering under today is a direct result of the failure of successive governments. They have failed to live up to their primary responsibility and obligation to ensure that the Bahamian people, all 350,000 of us - as the most precious "natural" resource above all natural and material resources, are nurtured to be economically and intellectually prosperous - allowing us, above all others who come or are brought to our shores, to contribute in significant and meaningful ways to the growth and development of our own country.


The Chairman of the governing Party made this perfectly clear when he told officials from the Communist Party of China few weeks ago, and I quote "I am particularly impressed with the success of your planning through your five year plans. I do believe a greater attention to national planning would be a great benefit to the Bahamas - not just every year a budget, but to have a vision over a longer term." The Chairman has acknowledged the absence of a long-term plan and that his party is devoid of vision, and . . . where there is no vision, the people perish.


How much longer Grand Bahama will you allow yourself to perish? How much longer will we, as a nation, allow ourselves to perish Bahamas? Led aimlessly through the wilderness by visionless leaders who continue to do the same thing over, and over, and over again, hoping for different results. This doing things over, and over, and over again and hoping to get different results, according to Albert Einstein, is nothing more than insanity.


Grand Bahama, tonight, we have come to your island to tell you and show you that our country is brimming with a whole generation of young people and young leaders who are waiting to put a stop to this madness, and we are calling on you to join us, JOIN US, and others across the Bahamas in telling this present leadership, thank you for your service, but your time is up. GAME OVER! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!


As the CEO's of this great island nation, you have every right to say to them "you have failed to live up to your obligations to the citizens of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, and it's time for you to go! No make-ups, no do-overs; YOU'RE FIRED!"


I think you will agree with me when I say that it is time for us to get back to government and governance that truly put people first; government and governance of the people, for the people, and by the people; government and governance that believe in Bahamian people and a Bahamas for Bahamians, where paradise is no longer just a place for the tourist to enjoy the beauty and bounty of this land, but a place where Bahamians can enjoy it too.


Now let me say that it is not my intention to lecture, chastise, or insult the intelligence of anyone listening to me tonight; And I hope that, in saying what I am about to say, my words - in no way - are taken as an affront or offensively, as I, admittedly, do not know all that there is to know about Freeport and Grand Bahama. But after coming to this island repeatedly, seeing firsthand the depressed and repressive conditions under which so many are being forced to exist, there is no way that I can speak about future hopes to you without first honestly addressing and taking head on the very force or forces that stands in the way of hope's progress. So whereas I may stand to be corrected, I will not make any apologies for what I am about to say.


The Grand Bahama Port Authority came about as a result of a trust agreement - a formal agreement by which a trustor, in this case the Government of the Bahamas, vests the ownership rights, or title, to one or more assets - in this case, areas of the land in the Port Area of Freeport - to one or more trustees for conservation and protection on behalf of those entitled to the beneficial interest of the trust. This trust relies on the integrity, strength, ability, and surety of individuals; those persons who place their trust in the hands of trustees have confidence, hope, and a certain belief that their interests will genuinely be looked after in the long term.


 


Now, it is my understanding that part of the trust agreement between the Government of the Bahamas and the developers of Freeport was that Freeport would have been developed into an industrial base for the benefit of the Bahamas. It is also my understanding that to make the Port economically viable and attractive to foreign investors, the government agreed to, and put in place, 99 years of tax-free concessions. And I am also led to believe that, as a result, the Port Authority had an obligation - for those 99 years - to ensure that it promoted and encouraged the establishment of factories and industries to benefit the Bahamian economy and provide employment for the people of Grand Bahama. Free from all "duties and emergency taxes" on equipment and supplies that would be necessary for the maintenance, repair, and operation, among other things, of all roads, parks, places of beautification and recreation, and "all other buildings and accommodation of every kind in Freeport," in short, the promise of this island was that it was to be a progressive little city that would incorporate and be economically beneficial to Grand Bahamians from settlements across the island and the Bahamas, in general.


Now, I do not want to sound disingenuous by giving the impression that, over the years, good has not come to some in Freeport and Grand Bahama, and that many have not benefited from the Freeport of the good old days; But I think it was Sir Lynden Pindling, in 1969, who said, "There are many people in the Bahamas who participate and are interested in the economic development of the Bahamas. Not all of them, however, are cognizant of or interested in the economic and social welfare of the Bahamian people . . . and far too many have adopted the attitude that they have certain guaranteed rights to make money and that is all that matters."


In 1969, the former Prime Minister too recognized that some economic opportunities had come to Grand Bahama as a result of the Port Agreement, but he also recognized an ugly reality that still exists today, people are still being victimized - in a sense - because money is all that matters to most who come, still under the guise of creating and participating in economic development for the benefit of the Bahamas.


"I had very much hoped that the events of the last few years," said Mr. Pindling, "would have been sufficient to impress on developers, apartment owners, and real estate agents that I could not stand idly by and watch a haven of economic success spring up in Freeport and ghettoes develop around it. I had very much hoped that


serious steps would have been taken to solve the long-standing problem of housing Bahamians here, but these hopes have been dashed to the ground."


Again that was in 1969, but to the grandmothers and grandfathers of the mothers and fathers of the young boys and young girls growing up in the difficult areas of Pineridge, and Marco City, where there is not only a problem of housing, but sometimes no housing at all, the dilemma of dashed hopes in Pindling's 1969 statement is the same dilemma of dashed hopes that they must face in their everyday lives growing up in the shadows of a dwindling success.


Again, I stand to be corrected, but in 1955, the people of Grand Bahama were placed - by the Government of the Bahamas - in the care and trust of another, with the confidence, the belief, and the hope that they, along with both trustor and trustee, would have been beneficiaries of this trust.


I believe that in 1955 a deal was made, but as it stands today, every indication is that the deal made in '55, is now broken in 2011, and the people of Grand Bahama, caught in the middle are now suffering.


When I listen to Ms. Andrews, a hardworking young mother of two, who, despite being employed, is evicted from her home and forced to send her children out of Grand Bahama to live with other family members because she cannot feasibly stay afloat financially in this repressed economy - no matter how hard she tries - I cannot help but conclude that there has seemingly been a breach of contract; and something is not right here in Freeport.


When I speak with Phaybian, a young man hanging out in Pineridge, and he tells me that he is not looking for a hand out from the government; that all he is looking for is steady work, more opportunities, and a chance to be self-reliant, so that he can feel better about helping himself, I cannot help but wonder why it is that he falls outside an Agreement that, more than anything else guaranteed him, as a low-to-middle-class income earner living in Freeport, that he would have adequate employment opportunities to be self-sufficient and self-reliant. When I hear this, I say someone; somewhere is in breach of trust.


When I go into West End or Eight Mile Rock or High Rock, and I see people with no safe place of abode that they can call home; or people sick or turned away because they have no proper medical facility and bed space to address their growing health concerns; or I hear stories of people brought to the level of having to beg or steal for a meal at the end of the day; or young people full of apathy, brought on by the force of complacency that is taking over this nation as a result of the lack of meaningful opportunities, I say SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE on this island, or SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE in the halls of Government in New Providence is in breach of a trust that was placed in them by the people of the Bahamas to protect their interest and allow them to live adequately, provide for themselves and their families, and grow old and retire with dignity and respect.


I say something is terribly wrong; and we can blame hurricane Francis, and Jeane, and Wilma; or we can blame the global recession; or we can blame the Grand Bahama Port Authority, if we like; But I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news, Grand


Bahama, the government of the Bahamas - the ones who you have repeatedly trusted to look out for you in your most genuine time of need; the Government of the Bahamas - the ones who come to you every five years begging, pleading, and - who promise you - election year after election year - that they will get it right the next time; those same governments are in breach of your trust; they have failed you when you needed them most and are still failing you, because they have not and are not living up to the rightful obligations of governments, as keepers of the people and of the nation.


The life of the Grand Bahamian, and many throughout the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, has become the life of the invisible man. And many of you, as a result of long years of oppression and struggling to be recognized and tolerated, are so drained of self-respect that you have adjusted to being invisible.


But I will paraphrase the iconic African American novelist, Ralph Ellison, and say, you are no invisible man; you are no figment of someone's imagination; you are men and women of substance, of flesh and blood, fiber and liquid - and you possess a mind. The only reason you are invisible to them is because they REFUSE TO SEE YOU!


The stark reality is that in the eyes of your present day leaders, you do not exist. But I can guarantee when you hear the DNA say that we will put people first - and mind you, you will now hear everyone trying to play catch up by saying the same thing and they do not even sound genuine when they say it - but when you hear the DNA say "WE WILL PUT PEOPLE FIRST," you can rest assured that we will see every inch of flesh, every drop of blood, and every fiber that makes you the men and women you are.


We will not ignore you and pretend that, when your electricity is off, everything is alright; that when you are hungry and have no food to feed your family, that you are alright; when your children are on extended holiday because you can't pay fees; insurance has lapsed and you are at the end of your rope, we will not pretend that you do not exist. Under a DNA government, not only would we know who you are, but we will also be there for you, as responsible governments should.


Together we will help you climb out of this hole that has been dug for you so that your dreams of being proud Grand Bahamians will no longer have to be deferred.


Now, I think it is apparent that the Grand Bahama Port Authority is under duress. It is evident that it is only a shell of its original self; and for all intents and purposes, its present leadership can most likely and may appreciate the help, assistance, and understanding of a concerned government. No longer can the Government, the Port Authority, or the Bahamian people allow the dream of Grand Bahama to be deferred, and we must come together to put Grand Bahama back on track.


What I am about to propose is not a comprehensive listing of the DNA'S goals and vision for Freeport and Grand Bahama, but only a few suggestive initiatives that we would like to pursue in getting you and your island back on your feet again.


In the upcoming weeks and months, we would like to engage you the residents, licensees, and Port Officials, and other stakeholders in the success of Grand Bahama in a series of Town Hall meetings to get your input and recommendations on the transformation of your island.


Tonight, however, The DNA would like to propose that within the first 180 days after taking office:


  • The Party, along with the Principles and stakeholders in the Port Agreement, begin the process of transformation by engaging in meaningful dialogue to ensure that the Port Agreement of 1955 and its subsequent amendments are relevant to the realities, the needs, and current challenges of a modern day Grand Bahama and its citizenry.
  • Within the first 180 days, the Party will engage in meaningful dialogue with locally owned Private Authorities to lower port taxes with the eye to attracting greater numbers of air and cruise visitors so as to once again stimulate the local economy.
  • The Party will agitate for the creation of a government owned dock and cruise port in the Hepburn Town Area of Eight Mile Rock to enable local business persons to have easier access to trade and commerce.
  • To further jump-start the economy of Grand Bahama, the DNA will move to bring incentive legislation that would allow business entities throughout Grand Bahama, for a period of time, to enjoy the same concessions that are presently granted to licensees of the Port. That would mean that the bone fishing lodge owner in Pelican Point would more easily be able to afford the tools and equipment necessary to guarantee a world-class experience for his client, both foreign and domestic. This would also mean that commercial tour operators would no longer be solely restricted to the port area, but now will be able to bring large numbers of visitors straight into West End - the cultural heart of Grand Bahama - in their bonded vehicles.
  • Within the first 180 days, the DNA will move to diversify the economy of Grand Bahama by leasing tracks of land for the specific development of film and creative arts studios in the eastern end of Grand Bahama, helping to create and foster the growth of a whole new industry yet to be fully tapped anywhere else in the region other than in Orlando.
  • Through private/public partnerships, we will invest in the development of a flagship School of Film and Creative Arts to be located in the eastern end of Grand Bahama on the campus of the College of Bahamas, attracting, training, and educating the highly skilled workforce that will be needed to meet the needs of and sustain the growing creative industry.
  • We will work in concert with the Grand Bahama Port Authority to actively recruit leading manufacturing and technology companies to establish centers in the Port area of Grand Bahama.
  • We will invest in the development of a flagship school of Science and Technology, either in conjunction with the College of the Bahamas or an upgraded Bahamas Technical and Vocational Institute; to provide the highly skilled workforce necessary
  • for the growth and sustenance of the proposed manufacturing and technological industries.
  • Now, Nathan Walters suggests that the condition of one's environment says a great deal about his or her place and value to society; he further implies that the individual's willingness to believe in his or her ability to be successful in life, or the ability to believe that he or she can pursue and achieve greatness is, in part, dependent upon the environment in which the individual finds him or herself.
  • Therefore, in those most hard pressed areas of Freeport and the outlying settlements, in addition to providing a wide range of employment opportunities, within the first 180 days, the DNA, in collaboration with the Grand Bahama Port Authority, private businesses, and residents of those affected areas, propose to spearhead a series of improvement and beautification projects aimed at transforming the environment and living spaces of the area's residents.
  • And as a part of our national educational initiative, we will ensure that the schools in Grand Bahama, as with all schools in the Bahamas, are centers of excellence; that they are well managed, well staffed, and that the curriculum is redesigned so that it is both inspiring and engaging, meeting and challenging the various gifts, talents, and abilities of our young people; and producing critically minded, socially conscious citizens, who, aware of their social and environmental conditions, will be able to use their knowledge and skills to change their lives, the lives of others in their society, the region, and indeed the world. We will ensure that there is NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND!
  • And finally, this one is simple; The DNA, within its first 180 days in office, will move to begin the construction of hurricane shelters on the island, for the protection of the people, particularly since hurricane after hurricane has devastated the lives of so many here on the island.

Now once again, I remind you that this is only a few of the many suggestive goals and initiatives that we are prepared to set in motion once we take office. However, in coming up with the living document that will serve as our Government's version of Grand Bahama's development plan, the DNA will fully engage the stakeholders of Grand Bahama. And we look forward to your participation.


I would like to say that for us to be successful as a nation and as a people, it is time for us to come up with ideas and strategies where we can use the industries that we presently have in place as revenue generators, while at the same time, find new and creative ways to diversify our economy to meet the growing and varied needs of our Bahamian people; no longer are we in the 20th century, and no longer can we use 20th century thinking to solve our country's 21st century global problems.


We must begin laying the framework for an economy that is less based on physical capital in favor of one that is dependent on human intellectual capital, as this is more important to the society's welfare than physical capital can ever be; Ask the Government and people of Singapore.


We must move away from an economy that thrives primarily on imported goods and servitude, and create an economy that thrives more on production, driven primarily by exported goods and services created - in many forms - by technology, manufacturing, innovation, and invention.


We must have a more concise plan for the mobilization of our landmass, where each island is developed and advanced so as to play an integral part in our country's developmental well-being.


We must see to it that education is harnessed and used by Bahamians as a tool that can be used to meet more of their own consumer needs, and at the same time, meet and fulfill the needs of many of our global neighbors, particularly those in other Caribbean nations.


We must ensure that the workers of this nation are not being asked to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, unless we first give them boots - WITH STRAPS - so that they can live up to our requirements of them. For far too long they have struggled to prove themselves as upwardly mobile without getting or having the necessary support systems in place. The workers of this nation will be respected for the value that they bring to the advancement and development of this nation.


No longer can we, as a government and as a people, take a hands-off approach to our country's progress. Together, Together, we must take control and clearly define our national needs and goals. The future of our country must be one by which we have a clear direction of where we want our country to go, and - God forbid - in the absence of qualified and skilled Bahamians, we invite others from the outside to assist US with the building of our national dreams - instead of us using our labor to continually build the dreams of others.


Only when we begin to move in these directions, Putting Bahamian People First, and valuing them as the most precious resource, will we become "a nation where the individual and corporate productivity are equal with self-worth and where the love of work is esteemed as a national obligation."


It is unfortunate that we have come to a point in our country's history, once again, where the people must rise up in revolt against their treatment at the hands of their own government. However, the yearning for freedom from the chains of oppression that have weighed us down in recent years is growing stronger each day; and in the words of Martin Luther King, "oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever."


The uprising taking place in our country today and the growing number of people who are expressing their frustration and anger at the present and past government, says that, we as a people, have come full circle in our quest for true independence and that we have lost faith in our chosen leaders to deliver on the promises made to us decades, even years ago. How many more broken political promises can an already broken people take before saying STOP! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!


Now more than ever - is the time to redefine history; Now more than ever is the time for change; And for those of you who doubt me, I say, if not now, then when? I say, If not you and me; then who?


This election, my friends, is too important to sit back and wait. You have waited long enough; you have allowed your dreams to be deferred for too long. Remember, this one is for our children, and their children, and their children also. We must decide whether we want change or more of the same. Let me repeat that, do we want change or more of the same!!!


Ladies and gentlemen let our country no longer be a place where the forces of complacency, oppression, insensitivity, bitterness, and hate weigh us down and cripple us.


Remember, my brothers and sisters, you are not alone in this movement, together, TOGETHER, we can - and will - BE THE CHANGE THAT WE WANT TO SEE.


As always, I would like to thank my wife, Lisa, and my children, Kasia, Tai, and Khail who are all here tonight. I would like to thank all those who continue to work so diligently behind the scene to ensure that the DNA Party succeeds in its aim to become the next government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. Further, I wish to thank the people of Grand Bahama and the Bahamas for allowing me this great opportunity to serve and help you realize and fulfill the power of the dream - and REDEFINE THE POSSIBLE. Remember the words of John Fitzgerald Kennedy: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." In the shaping of our country, let us become self-disciplined and self-reliant and there will be no other destiny in store for us than to be recognized as the nation of excellence that is The Commonwealth of The Bahamas.


And now, before I leave you tonight, it is my distinct pleasure to introduce to you the latest of the Democratic National Alliance's 41 candidates for change; men and women not cut from the cloth of political sameness, but who are Of the people, For the people, and coming to work side by side With the people. Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to introduce to you, 9 future Members of Parliament in the next DNA government of the Bahamas.


Thank You; God Bless You; and God Bless and Protect the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.


From mydnaparty.org