Holowesko denies conflict claim...
Responds to PLP’s claims about BTC board appointment
Professional money manager Mark Holowesko has strongly denied claims made by the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) that his recent appointment to the board of the newly-privatized Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) represents a conflict.
At the close of the deal with Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) early this month, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham announced that Holowesko, a principal of Holowesko Capital Partners, is one of the three members who will represent the government on the board.
In a recent press statement, the PLP attached general information from Franklin Templeton Investment Funds that lists Holowesko as a member of the board of directors.
Franklin Templeton Investments Portfolio Holdings — also included as part of the press release — shows that Franklin Templeton holds shares in Cable and Wireless Communications.
But Holowesko dismissed claims that he has been appointed to the BTC board to serve interests other than the government and the people of The Bahamas.
“I am not intimately involved in Cable and Wireless,” Holowesko told The Nassau Guardian.
“I own no shares in Cable and Wireless personally and I don’t know that I’ve ever bought any shares in Cable and Wireless for myself or the funds that I’m directly responsible for.”
But the PLP highlighted what it called an apparent conflict.
“At the time of the announcement of Mr. Holowesko to the board of BTC, no disclosure was made by the prime minister or Cable and Wireless of the apparent divided loyalty of Mr. Holowesko,” the PLP said.
“Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition demands to know in whose interest is Mr. Holowesko serving.
“Is Mr. Holowesko representing the interest of the Bahamian people as a government appointee to the board, or is he there as a representative of the company for which he is employed, or is it both?”
But Holowesko said there are several erroneous statements in the PLP’s release.
One of them, he said, is the suggestion that he is paid by Franklin Templeton Investments.
And he said none of the funds he manages holds shares in Cable and Wireless.
Holowesko said he was inquiring with the Franklin Templeton office in the United States about whether any of the funds on whose board he sits holds shares in Cable and Wireless.
“I am a director for a group of funds over in Europe for the Templeton SICAV funds,” he explained.
“Franklin Templeton Investments isn’t the correct legal name for it. Franklin Templeton is a company incorporated in America, which is an investment management company and they have mutual funds in Europe under a Luxembourg umbrella fund called SICAV fund and I am a board member of those funds.
“I’m not a director of Franklin Templeton, the investment management company. I’m a director of some of the funds that they run over in Europe. That’s an important distinction.
“Franklin Templeton funds may or may not own Cable and Wireless shares.”
Further explaining his role with the investment group, Holowesko said, “Franklin Templeton is a company that runs funds all over the world and the funds that I’m a director on, I’m making an educated guess, are about 20 or 30 percent of the mutual funds that they manage, so they’re not the US funds or the Canadian funds. They’re the European funds. Those funds may or may not own Cable and Wireless shares.”
Holowesko explained that as a director on the board of certain funds, he would have no specific knowledge of the day-to-day activities of them.
“I’m not involved in the day-to-day management of those funds. As a director we meet twice a year in London to basically review the operational activities of those funds,” he said.
“The day-to-day investment management of those funds is not under us as directors and I’m not an insider in terms of knowing what they buy and sell and when they buy and sell.
“I do get reports as a director at certain periods in terms of what the funds hold at that point in time, and whether or not those funds own shares in Cable and Wireless today I don’t know and I’ve asked the legal department of Franklin Templeton to let me know and I’ll have that response.”
Holowesko was contacted by The Nassau Guardian to respond to the PLP statement.
The opposition party said, “The nagging questions persist as to what role Holowesko is playing in this BTC, Cable and Wireless marriage.”
“Was Mr. Mark Holowesko involved in the sale of BTC to Cable and Wireless, a company he is intimately involved in as an investor, from the beginning?
“If so, in what capacity? Who was he serving then and who is he serving now?”
But Holowesko said he played no role in bringing Cable and Wireless to the table for the BTC deal. In fact, he said he knows very little about the transaction.
“I have very little knowledge and I have had absolutely zero activity in the sale to Cable and Wireless,” he said.
“As a matter of fact when the prime minister asked me to go on the board, I said ‘one of my main concerns is I don’t know enough about this transaction. If you want me to go on the board you need to have somebody fill me in on this transaction.
“So it is completely and totally erroneous that I have any knowledge or any kind of involvement in this transaction. I have zero involvement in this transaction and I know very little about it.”
Holowesko said he has a meeting with government representatives on Thursday so he can learn more about the specifics of the CWC/BTC transaction and what will be expected of him as a board member.
Holowesko was also asked whether Franklin Templeton Investments is benefiting in any way from the BTC sale.
“I have no idea,” he said.
In its statement, the PLP also said it had been informed that the parent company of Cable and Wireless Communications, Temasek Holdings, is the majority shareholder of Singapore Telecommunications Limited.
“A major shareholder of SingTel is Templeton Global Advisors Limited which falls under the umbrella of Franklin Templeton Investments,” the PLP said.
“Temasek Holdings Limited’s 54 percent ownership of SingTel is under the control of the Government of Singapore.”
Holowesko explained: “Temasek is a company in Singapore which is 100 percent owned by the Singaporean government, which the Singaporean government uses as its vehicle for investing on behalf of the Singaporean people, and nobody owns shares in that company other than the government of Singapore. I have no interaction with that company.
“And how that company is somehow involved in Cable and Wireless I wouldn’t know, and to somehow imply that we have some sort of interest or I have some sort of interest in that company is like saying the average American has some sort of interest in the US Treasury. It’s silly.
“That’s just loony. Total fabrication.”
Company documents with information on Franklin Templeton Investment Funds’ board of directors has a brief reference to “Temasek”, but not the company.
The company address of one of the Franklin Templeton directors — Dr. J. B. Mark Mobius, executive chairman of Templeton’s Emerging Markets Group — is listed as “7 Temasek Boulevard” in Singapore.
Asked how he felt about the claims being made by the PLP, Holowesko, who is the son of Senate President Lyn Holowesko, said, “I’m not a politician. I’m a businessman and a family man. I’ve had family members in politics. I don’t like politics. I abhor politics.
“I find most of it to be a waste of time for these particular reasons that I’m involved in right now. This is time wasting. As far as I’m concerned it’s non-productive and I guess politicians like to do these sorts of things for a variety of reasons. And whatever reasons they have I guess it’s up to them.”
Holowesko said he was asked by the prime minister to be a member of the BTC board and he hopes to make a positive contribution on behalf of the government and the Bahamian people.
“From an investment perspective, I’ve been in the investment business since 1985. So I have a lot of investment experience,” he said.
“…From what I understand — and I’ll get more information [this] week — there’s some very specific things that Cable and Wireless is supposed to do as part of this purchase for The Bahamas and my role on that board is to ensure that they do those things first and foremost.”
The two other government members of the BTC board are Maria Ferere, a partner of FT Consultants Ltd., and Deidre Prescott, who works for the Bahamas Electricity Corporation and previously served as a director on the BTC board.
Four employees of LIME (CWC’s Caribbean arm) are also members of the new board, including LIME CEO David Shaw.
4/26/2011
thenassauguardian
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label CWC Bahamas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CWC Bahamas. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) has found no friend in the Perry Gladstone Christie lead Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)
Undoing the BTC deal
By CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Could it be done?
Officials of Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) appear to have their work cut out for them.
In addition to delivering on all they and the government promised in the months and weeks leading up to the recent controversial closing of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) privatization process, they must convince hundreds of BTC workers that CWC is not the enemy, but a caring employer and strategic partner in every sense.
That may be a tough task, but perhaps not an impossible one.
Accepting the defeat that has been handed to them, BTC union leaders have met with CWC representatives to try to iron out the best arrangements for their jittery members.
While it may reach agreement with the previously enraged unions, what is clear is that CWC has found no friend in the Progressive Liberal Party, and if its leader, Perry Gladstone Christie, delivers on what he promises if he wins the next general election, CWC could face more problems that it bargained for.
But that’s if Christie wins, and if he follows through on his warning to undo this deal.
The former prime minister issued the threat to CWC on several occasions, most recently a week ago as the company and the government were preparing to finalize the transaction.
“This is a bad deal,” Christie said.
“The deal stinks and the PLP remains committed to regaining this asset for the Bahamian people and allow the Bahamian public to have a full and public view of the entirety of this transaction.”
But while Christie is sure he would undo the deal, he apparently has not yet settled on how it would be achieved.
Each time he threatened to change the terms of the deal, we carried the warning, but there really was never any indication about what steps he would take to deliver on this promise if he forms the next government.
So National Review decided to ask him.
Christie revealed that he would seek advice from lawyers because it would have to be done legally, of course.
“The mechanics will have to be left to the kind of advice we will get on the matter,” he told us.
“I’m not prepared to comment on those matters.”
Three PLP parliamentarians who are lawyers also told us they are not prepared to speak behind the leader.
One of them said, “We won’t get our messages mixed up on this one.”
So what really would be Christie’s options on this?
Thomas Evans, QC, was not intimately involved in the BTC deal, but has vast knowledge of the law and commercial transactions.
“Because they are the government I suppose they can do whatever they choose,” said Evans, speaking generally about governments.
Evans recalled years back when he was in the Office of the Attorney General.
He was bold enough to write to the government and advise it could not do something.
“I was very quickly rebuffed and told ‘Look, we’re the government. We can do whatever we feel like doing’. That’s true, but there are consequences for certain things that they do.”
Evans pointed out that if one party reneges on an obligation that it assumes in entering a contract, then that violates and encroaches on the other party, and that other party is entitled to sue and recover damages for whatever loss is incurred as a result of the breach.
“So, while the government could go ahead and not perform an obligation which it assumed, there are consequences,” he repeated.
PENALTIES
Another lawyer close to the PLP suggested to us that one way in which a new Christie administration could force a deal change is by reducing the three-year exclusivity period for cellular service.
“CWC would have to determine how that would affect its commercial interest because the deal may no longer be viable,” noted the lawyer who did not want to be named.
“It may give them a commercial impetus to say rather than just paying us the penalty we want out of the entire deal.”
But that would call for hefty penalties.
In its agreement with CWC, the government has agreed “to pay to the purchaser such amount as is equal to the loss, expense, damage or other liability (calculated on the same basis as would be used for determining damages for breach of contract) incurred by the purchaser which arises as a result of a second cellular license being issued prior to the third anniversary of completion, and/or a second and third cellular license being issued prior to the fifth anniversary of completion.”
Under the agreement, the government has agreed to pay CWC $100 million if one or more additional cellular licenses are issued within the next year.
It would have to pay $80 million if one or more licences are issued within the next two years and it would have to pay $40 million if it issues one or more licenses within the next three years.
If the government issues a third cellular license after the third anniversary of the closing of the sale, but prior to the fifth anniversary of completion, it would be subject to a $20 million penalty.
So it would seem unlikely that the Christie administration might want to go this route, but given that Christie has not yet received advice from lawyers, that of course remains unclear.
Evans said if the government decides to go to Cable and Wireless asking for two percent of the shares back, it would likely have great difficulty “because you’ve got a deal.”
“Once a contract has been entered into between two parties it can’t be changed unless you have the consent of both parties,” he explained.
“It can’t be altered. One person can’t unilaterally alter the terms of the contract, even if you are the government.
“So, Cable and Wireless would say ‘Look, the deal I have is a deal. I acquired 51 percent. That’s what I wanted. I am not interested in 49 percent, and I’m just not going to agree.
“I don’t know that there’s any way that the government, even though they’re the government, would be able to compel Cable and Wireless to agree to surrender their two percent.”
Evans said the fact that a new party takes over the government doesn’t change the obligations that were assumed by the previous party because the government is the government.
“A party doesn’t make the government even though the constitution says that after an election the prime minister is the person who is the leader of the party that has the majority in Parliament.
“To that extent there’s a measure of connection between the government and a political party. But the point I’m seeking to make is that the government is the government.”
TAX FRUSTRATIONS
When he spoke in the House of Assembly recently, Golden Gates MP Shane Gibson, who served as a minister in the Christie Cabinet, noted that there are all sorts of creative ways in which a PLP government could pull the rug from under CWC.
Gibson — who served as president of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) during initial attempts to privatize the then BaTelCo in the 1990s — expanded on those comments when he spoke with us for this piece.
“Obviously Cable and Wireless would have gotten what they consider to be an air-tight agreement from the government,” he said.
“And they are making it very difficult to introduce competition [any time soon] and they are making it difficult to have any other operator come in here, and making it difficult for a new government to be in a position to force them back to the table.
“As I said in Parliament, there are many ways that you can force a company like Cable and Wireless back to the table.
“We can tax them on certain aspects of their income; tax them on certain areas of the different services that they provide. For instance, we could put a special tax on mobile services. They’re the only one who provide mobile services in The Bahamas.
“So we tax them 15, 20 or 30 percent on mobile services, so there are many ways.”
Gibson had another idea.
“If we’re in charge of URCA (the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority), we could have discussions with URCA and make sure that individuals at URCA, advise them, or encourage them not to allow them (CWC) to go up on rates to offset taxes that they would have on certain parts of income.”
But given that URCA is an independent regulator, that too appears unlikely.
Gibson said that at the end of the day “it is known that the Bahamian public wants nothing to do with Cable and Wireless and they want BTC back in the hands of Bahamians.”
He said Bahamians have been running BTC for decades and “at the end of the day they almost feel that we are going back 100 years”.
“Once certain members of any elite group decide that they want to purchase, whether it is a property or a company, it is very difficult to persuade them to give it back to the people that it belongs to,” Gibson said.
“So it’s important to put it back in the hands of the people.”
CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
We also asked prominent attorney Brian Moree how Christie might be able to get BTC back in the hands of the people, if he is re-elected.
Moree, who had no involvement in the BTC deal, said given the very strong and very direct comments from Christie, one would assume that he has a legal basis for making those statements.
“It would be surprising that that position would be adopted unless they had the benefit of some advice to suggest that the transaction could be impeached or reversed if they were elected,” Moree said.
“Generally speaking, if you’re going to challenge a transaction of that sort retrospectively or after the event, one would have to look to see if there were any constitutional issues, which would be relevant and whether proceedings on the public law side of the court could be commenced, either by way of judicial review or some other process.”
Constitutional issues were raised by one respondent when URCA was considering the BTC/CWC deal.
That respondent asserted that the proposed exclusivity of the licensee is ultra vires the Constitution of The Bahamas.
The respondent stated that URCA cannot be party to an unconstitutional result and should require the applicants to address the question as to whether or not the exclusivity arrangement offends the Constitution.
URCA said it was aware of discussion of this issue by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Marpin Case2, a Dominican case in which the Judicial Committee held that a monopoly to control a means of communications can amount to a hindrance of freedom of expression, provided that it is proven that the restriction exceeds that which is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.
URCA noted that the Committee in that case did not make any conclusive finding, but referred the issue back to the Dominican courts for a consideration of the particular facts in the context of the above test.
“In any event, constitutional issues, such as this, are highly complex and would properly involve significant judicial scrutiny of the facts surrounding the challenged decision. URCA is not the appropriate forum to consider matters of constitutionality of legislation in The Bahamas, and is therefore not competent to determine this point,” URCA said.
Supporters of Christie’s plan to take back a controlling interest in BTC point to similar action taken by Prime Minister of Belize Dean Barrow who in 2009 brought legislation to nationalize Belize Telemedia Limited (BTL) in the public interest.
Barrow promised “fair and proper compensation” and said the move against BTL was not “some cowboy action, but something done in the full plentitude of, and compliance with, our constitution.”
INVESTOR CONFIDENCE
Moree said a degree of responsibility must be attributed to people in public life who make statements concerning these serious matters.
“That is why I said that I assume persons have obtained legal advice to support the position which they have adopted,” he said.
“I’m not aware of that legal advice, so I would not want to speculate.”
While he did not speculate, Moree raised the issue of investor confidence.
“The Bahamas as a sovereign country [must] acknowledge that there has to be a continuity of governance regardless of which political party is in power at any point in time,” he said.
“And when persons are dealing with the Government of The Bahamas, they have to have a level of confidence that their dealings — assuming that they’re lawful and they’re proper and there has been no corruption — they need to have the confidence that if they deal with the government which happens to be the FNM one day, that their transactions aren’t going to be the subject of litigation if another party comes in...”
Gibson said the Christie government has no problem with foreign investors, but is concerned about safeguarding national assets.
“If you look around and you try to identify one single project that this FNM government would have brought to The Bahamas since coming to office in 2007, I don’t think you could do that,” Gibsons aid.
“All of the projects that they are sitting and smiling over right now were projects that were initiated under the Progressive Liberal Party administration.
“And so, we’re not anti-foreign investors. We are anti-Cable and Wireless.”
Gibson said many Bahamians would have welcomed AT&T or T-Mobile, but not as majority shareholders.
“We’re not talking about foreign investors; we’re talking about this specific deal with Cable and Wireless, which seems to be the greatest giveaway ever in the history of The Bahamas,” the MP said.
PLPs would no doubt point to the instances where the Ingraham administration, upon assuming office in 2007 undid some of the deals left in place by the Christie-led government.
The straw market deal, incidentally, which was undone by Ingraham, remains unresolved with some of the professionals who had agreements with the government still waiting to be paid.
Of course, there were no such agreements on the magnitude of the BTC deal, but those actions by the new government led to the popular ‘stop, review and cancel’ phrase tossed about by PLP politicians.
When they took over last week, CWC executives seemed unbothered by Christie’s threats.
“In terms of our operations with government, we have a number of operations with governments across the globe in which we have very successful relations with them,” said Gerard Borely, chief financial officer of LIME, CWC’s regional arm.
“And we have successful relationships with governments no matter who is in power. The reason for that is because we deliver value and service to our consumers and governments, value that they appreciate. And we expect that to continue to be [the case] here.”
4/11/2011
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Could it be done?
Officials of Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) appear to have their work cut out for them.
In addition to delivering on all they and the government promised in the months and weeks leading up to the recent controversial closing of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) privatization process, they must convince hundreds of BTC workers that CWC is not the enemy, but a caring employer and strategic partner in every sense.
That may be a tough task, but perhaps not an impossible one.
Accepting the defeat that has been handed to them, BTC union leaders have met with CWC representatives to try to iron out the best arrangements for their jittery members.
While it may reach agreement with the previously enraged unions, what is clear is that CWC has found no friend in the Progressive Liberal Party, and if its leader, Perry Gladstone Christie, delivers on what he promises if he wins the next general election, CWC could face more problems that it bargained for.
But that’s if Christie wins, and if he follows through on his warning to undo this deal.
The former prime minister issued the threat to CWC on several occasions, most recently a week ago as the company and the government were preparing to finalize the transaction.
“This is a bad deal,” Christie said.
“The deal stinks and the PLP remains committed to regaining this asset for the Bahamian people and allow the Bahamian public to have a full and public view of the entirety of this transaction.”
But while Christie is sure he would undo the deal, he apparently has not yet settled on how it would be achieved.
Each time he threatened to change the terms of the deal, we carried the warning, but there really was never any indication about what steps he would take to deliver on this promise if he forms the next government.
So National Review decided to ask him.
Christie revealed that he would seek advice from lawyers because it would have to be done legally, of course.
“The mechanics will have to be left to the kind of advice we will get on the matter,” he told us.
“I’m not prepared to comment on those matters.”
Three PLP parliamentarians who are lawyers also told us they are not prepared to speak behind the leader.
One of them said, “We won’t get our messages mixed up on this one.”
So what really would be Christie’s options on this?
Thomas Evans, QC, was not intimately involved in the BTC deal, but has vast knowledge of the law and commercial transactions.
“Because they are the government I suppose they can do whatever they choose,” said Evans, speaking generally about governments.
Evans recalled years back when he was in the Office of the Attorney General.
He was bold enough to write to the government and advise it could not do something.
“I was very quickly rebuffed and told ‘Look, we’re the government. We can do whatever we feel like doing’. That’s true, but there are consequences for certain things that they do.”
Evans pointed out that if one party reneges on an obligation that it assumes in entering a contract, then that violates and encroaches on the other party, and that other party is entitled to sue and recover damages for whatever loss is incurred as a result of the breach.
“So, while the government could go ahead and not perform an obligation which it assumed, there are consequences,” he repeated.
PENALTIES
Another lawyer close to the PLP suggested to us that one way in which a new Christie administration could force a deal change is by reducing the three-year exclusivity period for cellular service.
“CWC would have to determine how that would affect its commercial interest because the deal may no longer be viable,” noted the lawyer who did not want to be named.
“It may give them a commercial impetus to say rather than just paying us the penalty we want out of the entire deal.”
But that would call for hefty penalties.
In its agreement with CWC, the government has agreed “to pay to the purchaser such amount as is equal to the loss, expense, damage or other liability (calculated on the same basis as would be used for determining damages for breach of contract) incurred by the purchaser which arises as a result of a second cellular license being issued prior to the third anniversary of completion, and/or a second and third cellular license being issued prior to the fifth anniversary of completion.”
Under the agreement, the government has agreed to pay CWC $100 million if one or more additional cellular licenses are issued within the next year.
It would have to pay $80 million if one or more licences are issued within the next two years and it would have to pay $40 million if it issues one or more licenses within the next three years.
If the government issues a third cellular license after the third anniversary of the closing of the sale, but prior to the fifth anniversary of completion, it would be subject to a $20 million penalty.
So it would seem unlikely that the Christie administration might want to go this route, but given that Christie has not yet received advice from lawyers, that of course remains unclear.
Evans said if the government decides to go to Cable and Wireless asking for two percent of the shares back, it would likely have great difficulty “because you’ve got a deal.”
“Once a contract has been entered into between two parties it can’t be changed unless you have the consent of both parties,” he explained.
“It can’t be altered. One person can’t unilaterally alter the terms of the contract, even if you are the government.
“So, Cable and Wireless would say ‘Look, the deal I have is a deal. I acquired 51 percent. That’s what I wanted. I am not interested in 49 percent, and I’m just not going to agree.
“I don’t know that there’s any way that the government, even though they’re the government, would be able to compel Cable and Wireless to agree to surrender their two percent.”
Evans said the fact that a new party takes over the government doesn’t change the obligations that were assumed by the previous party because the government is the government.
“A party doesn’t make the government even though the constitution says that after an election the prime minister is the person who is the leader of the party that has the majority in Parliament.
“To that extent there’s a measure of connection between the government and a political party. But the point I’m seeking to make is that the government is the government.”
TAX FRUSTRATIONS
When he spoke in the House of Assembly recently, Golden Gates MP Shane Gibson, who served as a minister in the Christie Cabinet, noted that there are all sorts of creative ways in which a PLP government could pull the rug from under CWC.
Gibson — who served as president of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) during initial attempts to privatize the then BaTelCo in the 1990s — expanded on those comments when he spoke with us for this piece.
“Obviously Cable and Wireless would have gotten what they consider to be an air-tight agreement from the government,” he said.
“And they are making it very difficult to introduce competition [any time soon] and they are making it difficult to have any other operator come in here, and making it difficult for a new government to be in a position to force them back to the table.
“As I said in Parliament, there are many ways that you can force a company like Cable and Wireless back to the table.
“We can tax them on certain aspects of their income; tax them on certain areas of the different services that they provide. For instance, we could put a special tax on mobile services. They’re the only one who provide mobile services in The Bahamas.
“So we tax them 15, 20 or 30 percent on mobile services, so there are many ways.”
Gibson had another idea.
“If we’re in charge of URCA (the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority), we could have discussions with URCA and make sure that individuals at URCA, advise them, or encourage them not to allow them (CWC) to go up on rates to offset taxes that they would have on certain parts of income.”
But given that URCA is an independent regulator, that too appears unlikely.
Gibson said that at the end of the day “it is known that the Bahamian public wants nothing to do with Cable and Wireless and they want BTC back in the hands of Bahamians.”
He said Bahamians have been running BTC for decades and “at the end of the day they almost feel that we are going back 100 years”.
“Once certain members of any elite group decide that they want to purchase, whether it is a property or a company, it is very difficult to persuade them to give it back to the people that it belongs to,” Gibson said.
“So it’s important to put it back in the hands of the people.”
CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
We also asked prominent attorney Brian Moree how Christie might be able to get BTC back in the hands of the people, if he is re-elected.
Moree, who had no involvement in the BTC deal, said given the very strong and very direct comments from Christie, one would assume that he has a legal basis for making those statements.
“It would be surprising that that position would be adopted unless they had the benefit of some advice to suggest that the transaction could be impeached or reversed if they were elected,” Moree said.
“Generally speaking, if you’re going to challenge a transaction of that sort retrospectively or after the event, one would have to look to see if there were any constitutional issues, which would be relevant and whether proceedings on the public law side of the court could be commenced, either by way of judicial review or some other process.”
Constitutional issues were raised by one respondent when URCA was considering the BTC/CWC deal.
That respondent asserted that the proposed exclusivity of the licensee is ultra vires the Constitution of The Bahamas.
The respondent stated that URCA cannot be party to an unconstitutional result and should require the applicants to address the question as to whether or not the exclusivity arrangement offends the Constitution.
URCA said it was aware of discussion of this issue by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Marpin Case2, a Dominican case in which the Judicial Committee held that a monopoly to control a means of communications can amount to a hindrance of freedom of expression, provided that it is proven that the restriction exceeds that which is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.
URCA noted that the Committee in that case did not make any conclusive finding, but referred the issue back to the Dominican courts for a consideration of the particular facts in the context of the above test.
“In any event, constitutional issues, such as this, are highly complex and would properly involve significant judicial scrutiny of the facts surrounding the challenged decision. URCA is not the appropriate forum to consider matters of constitutionality of legislation in The Bahamas, and is therefore not competent to determine this point,” URCA said.
Supporters of Christie’s plan to take back a controlling interest in BTC point to similar action taken by Prime Minister of Belize Dean Barrow who in 2009 brought legislation to nationalize Belize Telemedia Limited (BTL) in the public interest.
Barrow promised “fair and proper compensation” and said the move against BTL was not “some cowboy action, but something done in the full plentitude of, and compliance with, our constitution.”
INVESTOR CONFIDENCE
Moree said a degree of responsibility must be attributed to people in public life who make statements concerning these serious matters.
“That is why I said that I assume persons have obtained legal advice to support the position which they have adopted,” he said.
“I’m not aware of that legal advice, so I would not want to speculate.”
While he did not speculate, Moree raised the issue of investor confidence.
“The Bahamas as a sovereign country [must] acknowledge that there has to be a continuity of governance regardless of which political party is in power at any point in time,” he said.
“And when persons are dealing with the Government of The Bahamas, they have to have a level of confidence that their dealings — assuming that they’re lawful and they’re proper and there has been no corruption — they need to have the confidence that if they deal with the government which happens to be the FNM one day, that their transactions aren’t going to be the subject of litigation if another party comes in...”
Gibson said the Christie government has no problem with foreign investors, but is concerned about safeguarding national assets.
“If you look around and you try to identify one single project that this FNM government would have brought to The Bahamas since coming to office in 2007, I don’t think you could do that,” Gibsons aid.
“All of the projects that they are sitting and smiling over right now were projects that were initiated under the Progressive Liberal Party administration.
“And so, we’re not anti-foreign investors. We are anti-Cable and Wireless.”
Gibson said many Bahamians would have welcomed AT&T or T-Mobile, but not as majority shareholders.
“We’re not talking about foreign investors; we’re talking about this specific deal with Cable and Wireless, which seems to be the greatest giveaway ever in the history of The Bahamas,” the MP said.
PLPs would no doubt point to the instances where the Ingraham administration, upon assuming office in 2007 undid some of the deals left in place by the Christie-led government.
The straw market deal, incidentally, which was undone by Ingraham, remains unresolved with some of the professionals who had agreements with the government still waiting to be paid.
Of course, there were no such agreements on the magnitude of the BTC deal, but those actions by the new government led to the popular ‘stop, review and cancel’ phrase tossed about by PLP politicians.
When they took over last week, CWC executives seemed unbothered by Christie’s threats.
“In terms of our operations with government, we have a number of operations with governments across the globe in which we have very successful relations with them,” said Gerard Borely, chief financial officer of LIME, CWC’s regional arm.
“And we have successful relationships with governments no matter who is in power. The reason for that is because we deliver value and service to our consumers and governments, value that they appreciate. And we expect that to continue to be [the case] here.”
4/11/2011
thenassauguardian
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Kirk Griffin's thoughts on the union between Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) and Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC)
Kirk Griffin on CWC
IN YOUR OWN WORDS
Former Acting CEO of Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) and newly-appointed advisor to the company Kirk Griffin offered his thoughts on Cable and Wireless Communications.
“I am fortunate to have been at BTC — at the executive level of the company — from the very beginning of the privatization process some 14 years ago. This has given me a unique perspective on the company, the industry and the necessity for BTC to be able to align itself with industry giants that can position BTC where it needs to be.
“I am not reluctant or shy to say that my team members and I at BTC are extremely proud of what we have been able to accomplish. We have consistently been profitable over the years as we have brought modern telecommunications throughout the length and breadth of The Bahamas. Our strengths and successess have been acknowledged by all reasonable observers, including our new colleagues at Cable and Wireless Communications. There can be no question that BTC has done well.
“However, by virtue of its small size, BTC is often disadvantaged because it cannot reach the economies of scale and command best prices from suppliers and vendors. At times, BTC even has difficulty attracting the attention of potential roaming partners as we seek to expand the connectivity of our very own customers across the globe.
“Further, as we all recognize the full liberalization of the telecommunications market is vital for the interests of Bahamian consumers and the vibrancy of the Bahamian economy, for BTC to compete in a fully liberalized market, up against the telecom giants of the world, it is critical that the company partners with a capable and competent global operator. CWC will help position BTC to effectively become and remain the provider of choice for consumers in The Bahamas, in a fully open and competitive marketplace.”
4/8/2011
thenassauguardian
IN YOUR OWN WORDS
Former Acting CEO of Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) and newly-appointed advisor to the company Kirk Griffin offered his thoughts on Cable and Wireless Communications.
“I am fortunate to have been at BTC — at the executive level of the company — from the very beginning of the privatization process some 14 years ago. This has given me a unique perspective on the company, the industry and the necessity for BTC to be able to align itself with industry giants that can position BTC where it needs to be.
“I am not reluctant or shy to say that my team members and I at BTC are extremely proud of what we have been able to accomplish. We have consistently been profitable over the years as we have brought modern telecommunications throughout the length and breadth of The Bahamas. Our strengths and successess have been acknowledged by all reasonable observers, including our new colleagues at Cable and Wireless Communications. There can be no question that BTC has done well.
“However, by virtue of its small size, BTC is often disadvantaged because it cannot reach the economies of scale and command best prices from suppliers and vendors. At times, BTC even has difficulty attracting the attention of potential roaming partners as we seek to expand the connectivity of our very own customers across the globe.
“Further, as we all recognize the full liberalization of the telecommunications market is vital for the interests of Bahamian consumers and the vibrancy of the Bahamian economy, for BTC to compete in a fully liberalized market, up against the telecom giants of the world, it is critical that the company partners with a capable and competent global operator. CWC will help position BTC to effectively become and remain the provider of choice for consumers in The Bahamas, in a fully open and competitive marketplace.”
4/8/2011
thenassauguardian
Saturday, March 26, 2011
The House of Assembly Passed the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) Privatization Resolutions
House approves BTC sale
By KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com
PM accidentally voted against sale, then changed vote
The Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) privatization resolutions were passed in the House of Assembly yesterday with 22 MPs voting in support of the resolutions and 18 voting against. The process to sell 51 percent of BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) is now almost finished.
All members of the official opposition voted against the resolutions. Independent MP for Bamboo Town Branville McCartney also voted against the resolutions.
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham initially made a mistake and he accidentally voted against the first privatization resolution. He was seemingly distracted, using his Blackberry phone, when his name was called to vote. Ingraham said, “No.”
When he realized the mistake, Ingraham quickly said, “Yes.”
His initial “no” vote led to loud cheers and laughter from opposition members.
When it came time to vote on the second resolution, Ingraham clearly said, “Yes.” This also led to laughter from the opposition, considering Ingraham’s initial mistake.
Both resolutions passed shortly after Ingraham wrapped up the debate yesterday evening.
“This is a historic day in the history of The Bahamas,” Ingraham said. “It is the culmination of a process that was started 14 years ago.”
In negotiating the BTC deal, he said the government was motivated by its desire to give Bahamians the best of what is available and to ensure that communications services are reliable and accessible.
Ingraham also accused the opposition of using the unions representing BTC employees as “pawns” in the fight against of sale of BTC to CWC.
Ingraham further criticized the leaders of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) and the Bahamas Communications and Public Managers Union (BCPMU) — the BTC unions — for leading their members down “the wrong path.”
The unions have led protests and legal action seeking to block the sale to CWC.
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) MP for Fort Charlotte Alfred Sears took offense to Ingraham’s “pawns” statement. He said the unions are mature groups with responsible leaders who can make independent decisions.
The BCPOU and BCPMU were seeking an injunction to stop the government from selling BTC.
However, Supreme Court Justice Neville Adderley said the unions lacked the legal capacity to institute and maintain the action in their own names.
The unions appealed the decision, but lost that bid before the Court of Appeal Tuesday.
The unions will face significant legal bills as a result of the failed court action.
Ingraham encouraged the unions to engage with CWC.
“I appeal to the leadership, to the unions, to begin to engage in discussions with their new bosses. Because they are going to be the bosses in short order and it makes good sense for them to have discussions,” he said. “Do not allow anyone to mislead you into believing that we do not have your best interests at heart. In fact, had they listened to me they wouldn’t have been stuck with the thousands of dollars in court fees.”
The legislation associated with the BTC sale will next be debated in the Senate.
3/25/2011
thenassauguardian
By KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com
PM accidentally voted against sale, then changed vote
The Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) privatization resolutions were passed in the House of Assembly yesterday with 22 MPs voting in support of the resolutions and 18 voting against. The process to sell 51 percent of BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) is now almost finished.
All members of the official opposition voted against the resolutions. Independent MP for Bamboo Town Branville McCartney also voted against the resolutions.
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham initially made a mistake and he accidentally voted against the first privatization resolution. He was seemingly distracted, using his Blackberry phone, when his name was called to vote. Ingraham said, “No.”
When he realized the mistake, Ingraham quickly said, “Yes.”
His initial “no” vote led to loud cheers and laughter from opposition members.
When it came time to vote on the second resolution, Ingraham clearly said, “Yes.” This also led to laughter from the opposition, considering Ingraham’s initial mistake.
Both resolutions passed shortly after Ingraham wrapped up the debate yesterday evening.
“This is a historic day in the history of The Bahamas,” Ingraham said. “It is the culmination of a process that was started 14 years ago.”
In negotiating the BTC deal, he said the government was motivated by its desire to give Bahamians the best of what is available and to ensure that communications services are reliable and accessible.
Ingraham also accused the opposition of using the unions representing BTC employees as “pawns” in the fight against of sale of BTC to CWC.
Ingraham further criticized the leaders of the Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) and the Bahamas Communications and Public Managers Union (BCPMU) — the BTC unions — for leading their members down “the wrong path.”
The unions have led protests and legal action seeking to block the sale to CWC.
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) MP for Fort Charlotte Alfred Sears took offense to Ingraham’s “pawns” statement. He said the unions are mature groups with responsible leaders who can make independent decisions.
The BCPOU and BCPMU were seeking an injunction to stop the government from selling BTC.
However, Supreme Court Justice Neville Adderley said the unions lacked the legal capacity to institute and maintain the action in their own names.
The unions appealed the decision, but lost that bid before the Court of Appeal Tuesday.
The unions will face significant legal bills as a result of the failed court action.
Ingraham encouraged the unions to engage with CWC.
“I appeal to the leadership, to the unions, to begin to engage in discussions with their new bosses. Because they are going to be the bosses in short order and it makes good sense for them to have discussions,” he said. “Do not allow anyone to mislead you into believing that we do not have your best interests at heart. In fact, had they listened to me they wouldn’t have been stuck with the thousands of dollars in court fees.”
The legislation associated with the BTC sale will next be debated in the Senate.
3/25/2011
thenassauguardian
Thursday, March 24, 2011
The "evil role" of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) in the Privatisation Process of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC)
Maynard: BTC/CWC Issue Damaging Bahamians’ Psyche
By IANTHIA SMITH
Golden Isles Member of Parliament Charles Maynard said he believes Bahamians have been brainwashed into thinking that the deal between the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) and Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) is more controversial than it really is.
Mr. Maynard said as much as he led off day two of debate on the BTC privatisation in the House of Assembly Tuesday afternoon.
In fact, he said it was a plan masterminded by the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) that has obviously been working as tensions mount in the country over the pending BTC/CWC deal.
He added that ever since the government made steps to privatise the state-owned company the official Opposition has played an "evil role" in the entire process, a process he said has toyed with the minds of the Bahamian people, and that he added was more then evident at those mass rallies, motorcades and protests that grabbed the country’s attention.
"They have done considerable damage to the psyche of many Bahamians," Mr. Maynard said. "They have stirred up emotions that really didn’t need to be stirred up and I think that the worst victims are the employees of BTC.
"What I don’t understand and cannot appreciate is why would you play with the emotions of the hardworking people at BTC, why would you do that? Why would you make people feel uncertain about their futures, why would you encourage them not to meet with who could be their potential new bosses? What benefit would that have to them?"
To say that the BTC/CWC issue has drawn battle lines in the country would be an understatement.
Free National Movement (FNM) and PLP supporters, BTC union representatives and workers and the general public are either for it or against it, but whatever their position they made it known with posters, bullhorns and even blood, sweat and tears.
But according to Mr. Maynard these actions are being fuelled by the PLP who he said is "behind all of the civil unrest in the country right now."
North Andros and Berry Islands MP Vincent Peet would tell you that while he has no problem privatising BTC, however, he said he does have a problem with the lack of transparency with the process.
"It appears to me that Cable &Wireless is the only winner here," he said. "Why is there a two per cent fixed operating fee to be paid to Cable &Wireless for managing BTC?
"It is highly improper for an entity to purchase another entity and then be paid to manage that new entity. This is a guaranteed amount and they get this money even if BTC doesn’t make a cent."
Mr. Peet also accused the government of "selling Bahamians’ generational property" to CWC.
However, Montagu MP Loretta Butler-Turner was quick to shoot down that thought as she claimed she has too strong of an attachment to the country to ever stand for such a thing.
"My grandfather Sir Milo Butler fought for the rights of Bahamians and (you) dare say I, who still live among my people would come in here and sell out our birthright for the Bahamians I live with and see everyday," she said.
"I am a third generation Bahamian. I don’t have to buy the loyalty of Montagu, I live among my people I have to pass them everyday. These are people that I go to church with, went to school with, that I live with, that I work with, they know me. They don’t have to worry about their MP selling out their birthright."
The debate is expected to end on Thursday.
March 23rd, 2011
jonesbahamas
By IANTHIA SMITH
Golden Isles Member of Parliament Charles Maynard said he believes Bahamians have been brainwashed into thinking that the deal between the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) and Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) is more controversial than it really is.
Mr. Maynard said as much as he led off day two of debate on the BTC privatisation in the House of Assembly Tuesday afternoon.
In fact, he said it was a plan masterminded by the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) that has obviously been working as tensions mount in the country over the pending BTC/CWC deal.
He added that ever since the government made steps to privatise the state-owned company the official Opposition has played an "evil role" in the entire process, a process he said has toyed with the minds of the Bahamian people, and that he added was more then evident at those mass rallies, motorcades and protests that grabbed the country’s attention.
"They have done considerable damage to the psyche of many Bahamians," Mr. Maynard said. "They have stirred up emotions that really didn’t need to be stirred up and I think that the worst victims are the employees of BTC.
"What I don’t understand and cannot appreciate is why would you play with the emotions of the hardworking people at BTC, why would you do that? Why would you make people feel uncertain about their futures, why would you encourage them not to meet with who could be their potential new bosses? What benefit would that have to them?"
To say that the BTC/CWC issue has drawn battle lines in the country would be an understatement.
Free National Movement (FNM) and PLP supporters, BTC union representatives and workers and the general public are either for it or against it, but whatever their position they made it known with posters, bullhorns and even blood, sweat and tears.
But according to Mr. Maynard these actions are being fuelled by the PLP who he said is "behind all of the civil unrest in the country right now."
North Andros and Berry Islands MP Vincent Peet would tell you that while he has no problem privatising BTC, however, he said he does have a problem with the lack of transparency with the process.
"It appears to me that Cable &Wireless is the only winner here," he said. "Why is there a two per cent fixed operating fee to be paid to Cable &Wireless for managing BTC?
"It is highly improper for an entity to purchase another entity and then be paid to manage that new entity. This is a guaranteed amount and they get this money even if BTC doesn’t make a cent."
Mr. Peet also accused the government of "selling Bahamians’ generational property" to CWC.
However, Montagu MP Loretta Butler-Turner was quick to shoot down that thought as she claimed she has too strong of an attachment to the country to ever stand for such a thing.
"My grandfather Sir Milo Butler fought for the rights of Bahamians and (you) dare say I, who still live among my people would come in here and sell out our birthright for the Bahamians I live with and see everyday," she said.
"I am a third generation Bahamian. I don’t have to buy the loyalty of Montagu, I live among my people I have to pass them everyday. These are people that I go to church with, went to school with, that I live with, that I work with, they know me. They don’t have to worry about their MP selling out their birthright."
The debate is expected to end on Thursday.
March 23rd, 2011
jonesbahamas
Saturday, March 12, 2011
The agenda to derail the privatisation of Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) for political gain and to protect vested interests
Propaganda and the pending BTC privatisation
By LARRY SMITH
AND now class, today we are going to talk about propaganda. Does anyone know what the word means?
It derives from the Latin for propagate, which means to multiply, reproduce or transmit. In this case, we are talking about spreading information.
What kind of information? Well, that is often hard to say. The key point to remember is that the information being presented will have an agenda. And in order to judge the value and quality of the information, you need to determine what that agenda is.
In a nutshell, propaganda uses loaded messages to produce an emotional response in support of an often hidden objective. And ever since the 1930s (when German and Soviet propaganda promoted state-sponsored genocide) the term has acquired a strong negative meaning - for good reason.
Journalists are supposed to be trained to give their audiences a reasonably accurate background and analysis of the subject at hand. Advertisers use an overt form of propaganda to persuade people to buy their products or services. Public relations lies somewhere in between, often presenting itself as journalism in support of a proprietary theme, which is not necessarily nefarious.
What sets propaganda apart more than anything else is that it seeks to influence public opinion through deception and confusion, rather than by encouraging genuine understanding.
According to Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, "The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."
What points instantly spring to mind in the local context? No turning back (to white rule); stop, review and cancel (good economic initiatives); Hubert "the dictator" Ingraham; selling our birthright (to white foreigners), the plantation economy (enslaves blacks).
But it's not just about repetitive slander. As British wartime propagandist (and later cabinet minister) Richard Crossman said: "The art of propaganda is not telling lies, but rather selecting the truth you require and giving it mixed up with some truths the audience wants to hear."
This is what we are seeing today with the (currently) one-sided debate over the pending privatisation of BTC.
Let's look at the recent constructs of a massive conspiracy to corruptly engineer the sale of BTC against the interests and wishes of the Bahamian people. Evidence for this is said to rest on a series of conflicts of interest, and was recently given credence by retired Tribune journalist Nicky Kelly, who now writes a column for the Punch.
"One has to ask why the PM is so motivated to pursue a deal that is so suspect, and the machinations of its participants so obvious, that they exhaust credulity," Kelly wrote.
In this view, a small group of unrelated people began moving chess pieces years ago to achieve the present result - the sale of half of BTC to Cable & Wireless Communications, within a regulatory environment developed and controlled by former CWC employees.
The inference is that the plot was hatched by CWC, with the support of leading Bahamian politicians and technical advisors, to save its future Caribbean business prospects. Or maybe it was the other way round, and our top politicos and bureaucrats simply planned to enrich themselves from CWC. In either case, the full background to the story is largely ignored and a massive corrupt scheme is offered as the obvious reality. The clear agenda is to derail the privatisation of BTC, both for political gain and to protect vested interests.
The full background to the story includes the fact that there were no less than three public bodies responsible for decision-making - the cabinet, the privatisation advisory committee, and the privatisation working committee. There were also two sets of financial advisors - KPMG Bahamas and CITI, a major international bank - as well as two legal advisors - Charles Russell, a British firm specialising in communications law (which also advised the Christie administration on regulatory reform), and local law firm Higgs & Johnson.
In short, there were significant checks and balances. And with so many separate groups of advisors it would be very difficult for a specific conflict of interest to flow through to a final sale. It also has to be acknowledged that the goal of liberalising the communications sector and finding a major strategic partner for BTC has been the accepted policy of both major parties for years - even more so in the case of the FNM, which launched the process in 1998.
And what about those conflicts of interest that have been selectively ignored by the conspiracy theorists. Conflicts like the participation of some of the major antagonists in the current debate in the earlier sale that was agreed by the Christie administration with Bluewater Ventures - a foreign firm with uncertain ownership and no operating history.
It has been suggested that some of them were heavily involved when that deal went down - together with some of the leaders of the same unions that are now so critical of the current process. What chess pieces were these players moving?
The Christie administration cancelled the original privatisation process launched by the FNM after rejecting existing bids, and then proceeded to negotiate solely with Bluewater from 2005 until the general election in May 2007. How is this any different from the Ingraham administration rejecting bids received in the current process, and then talking to CWC?
And let's not forget to take into account the stark contrast between Bluewater, an unknown private equity firm, and CWC, a major international telecoms provider with a long and publicly reported background in the field.
In fact, almost all of the bidders for BTC throughout this long and complicated process were private financiers who saw an opportunity to make money. Digicell and CWC are the most obvious telecoms buyers in the region, but Digicell (which decided not to bid in the last auction) is purely a cellular operator. CWC is one of the few entities that does everything BTC does throughout the region and has a strategic reason to invest for the long-term. And since CWC has been interested in the Bahamas for the last 15 years, how can it suddenly be suspicious when they step up to the plate?
It is easy to research a large global business like Cable & Wireless, which may have problems in some areas but a very healthy balance sheet overall. In fact, CWC is a leader in all regional markets except Jamaica where they are second. It should also be noted that, although declining to participate in the most recent auction due to an internal reorganisation, CWC eventually went through the same entry process as all other bidders.
As for the terms of the CWC agreement, it is a fact that all the bidders required BTC's unfunded pension deficit to be covered by government - including Bluewater. How can this now be "repugnant" to the PLP, when they agreed to pay off the full deficit and close the pension plan entirely. I would suggest that there is no business in the world where employees make zero contributions to their own pensions while the employer pays 20 per cent of salaries into a fund. This obviously has a huge impact on BTC's value.
It is also true that all the bidders - including Bluewater - demanded a management fee in their plans, something which some commentators find egregious. The rationale for the fee that was eventually agreed is that CWC brings a lot of added value to BTC in terms of technology and intellectual property, which will significantly benefit the other shareholder. This is normal practice where a minority partner is involved, and industry benchmarks are used to set the fee scale.
Clearly, connecting the dots selectively amounts to spouting propaganda. It does nothing to help people reach a genuine understanding of the issues. This is known as pinpointing the enemy - simplifying a complex situation by presenting a specific group or person as the enemy in a clear-cut choice between right and wrong. And the better informed you are, the less susceptible you will be to this type of propaganda.
One of the worst allegations in this saga was made recently by PLP Chairman Bradley Roberts (who was the minister responsible for BTC in the Christie administration). He accused current BTC chairman Julian Francis of a corrupt conflict of interest in awarding to Providence Advisors (a financial services company which Francis also chairs) a lucrative contract to manage part of the BTC pension fund.
"As a result of this contract that Julian Francis awarded to himself, he positioned himself and Providence Advisors Ltd to be paid in excess of $400,000 per annum for the past 3 years," Roberts said. "The PLP calls for Julian Francis' immediate resignation and for the police to commence investigations..."
The facts are that efforts to place BTC pension funds with local investment managers began in 2006 under the Christie administration, when Greg Bethel was BTC chairman and also president of Fidelity Bank & Trust - one of the firms chasing the business. Providence, headed by Kenwood Kerr, was also invited to bid, and was eventually approved (along with Fidelity and CFAL) in a process guided by the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche.
The actual contract was not executed until after the 2007 general election, and Francis (who is not a Providence shareholder) had nothing to do with choosing the investment managers. And Providence's fees over the past two and a half years were less than $350,000.
Statements from political operatives and unsupported extrapolations by sympathetic or thoughtless journalists are not the only forms of propaganda we must watch out for. There are also those entities which pose as legitimate news media. While party newspapers or radio broadcasts may be easily identified and their information taken with a grain of salt, some propaganda outlets try to disguise their true nature to fool an audience into believing they are presenting valid information.
The current prime example locally is the online propaganda outlet known as Bahamas Press, which refuses to even acknowledge that it is financed, owned and operated by real people, although it classifies itself as a "leading news website." An anonymous responder claimed the site is owned "by the people of the Bahamas."
As George Orwell wrote in his novel 1984, "the process (of mass-media deception) has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt."
Of course, now that I have waded into the propaganda swamp, I must be part of the conspiracy, right? Well, now you can make the call.
What do you think?
Send comments to
larry@tribunemedia.net
Or visit www.bahamapundit.com
March 09, 2011
tribune242
By LARRY SMITH
AND now class, today we are going to talk about propaganda. Does anyone know what the word means?
It derives from the Latin for propagate, which means to multiply, reproduce or transmit. In this case, we are talking about spreading information.
What kind of information? Well, that is often hard to say. The key point to remember is that the information being presented will have an agenda. And in order to judge the value and quality of the information, you need to determine what that agenda is.
In a nutshell, propaganda uses loaded messages to produce an emotional response in support of an often hidden objective. And ever since the 1930s (when German and Soviet propaganda promoted state-sponsored genocide) the term has acquired a strong negative meaning - for good reason.
Journalists are supposed to be trained to give their audiences a reasonably accurate background and analysis of the subject at hand. Advertisers use an overt form of propaganda to persuade people to buy their products or services. Public relations lies somewhere in between, often presenting itself as journalism in support of a proprietary theme, which is not necessarily nefarious.
What sets propaganda apart more than anything else is that it seeks to influence public opinion through deception and confusion, rather than by encouraging genuine understanding.
According to Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, "The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."
What points instantly spring to mind in the local context? No turning back (to white rule); stop, review and cancel (good economic initiatives); Hubert "the dictator" Ingraham; selling our birthright (to white foreigners), the plantation economy (enslaves blacks).
But it's not just about repetitive slander. As British wartime propagandist (and later cabinet minister) Richard Crossman said: "The art of propaganda is not telling lies, but rather selecting the truth you require and giving it mixed up with some truths the audience wants to hear."
This is what we are seeing today with the (currently) one-sided debate over the pending privatisation of BTC.
Let's look at the recent constructs of a massive conspiracy to corruptly engineer the sale of BTC against the interests and wishes of the Bahamian people. Evidence for this is said to rest on a series of conflicts of interest, and was recently given credence by retired Tribune journalist Nicky Kelly, who now writes a column for the Punch.
"One has to ask why the PM is so motivated to pursue a deal that is so suspect, and the machinations of its participants so obvious, that they exhaust credulity," Kelly wrote.
In this view, a small group of unrelated people began moving chess pieces years ago to achieve the present result - the sale of half of BTC to Cable & Wireless Communications, within a regulatory environment developed and controlled by former CWC employees.
The inference is that the plot was hatched by CWC, with the support of leading Bahamian politicians and technical advisors, to save its future Caribbean business prospects. Or maybe it was the other way round, and our top politicos and bureaucrats simply planned to enrich themselves from CWC. In either case, the full background to the story is largely ignored and a massive corrupt scheme is offered as the obvious reality. The clear agenda is to derail the privatisation of BTC, both for political gain and to protect vested interests.
The full background to the story includes the fact that there were no less than three public bodies responsible for decision-making - the cabinet, the privatisation advisory committee, and the privatisation working committee. There were also two sets of financial advisors - KPMG Bahamas and CITI, a major international bank - as well as two legal advisors - Charles Russell, a British firm specialising in communications law (which also advised the Christie administration on regulatory reform), and local law firm Higgs & Johnson.
In short, there were significant checks and balances. And with so many separate groups of advisors it would be very difficult for a specific conflict of interest to flow through to a final sale. It also has to be acknowledged that the goal of liberalising the communications sector and finding a major strategic partner for BTC has been the accepted policy of both major parties for years - even more so in the case of the FNM, which launched the process in 1998.
And what about those conflicts of interest that have been selectively ignored by the conspiracy theorists. Conflicts like the participation of some of the major antagonists in the current debate in the earlier sale that was agreed by the Christie administration with Bluewater Ventures - a foreign firm with uncertain ownership and no operating history.
It has been suggested that some of them were heavily involved when that deal went down - together with some of the leaders of the same unions that are now so critical of the current process. What chess pieces were these players moving?
The Christie administration cancelled the original privatisation process launched by the FNM after rejecting existing bids, and then proceeded to negotiate solely with Bluewater from 2005 until the general election in May 2007. How is this any different from the Ingraham administration rejecting bids received in the current process, and then talking to CWC?
And let's not forget to take into account the stark contrast between Bluewater, an unknown private equity firm, and CWC, a major international telecoms provider with a long and publicly reported background in the field.
In fact, almost all of the bidders for BTC throughout this long and complicated process were private financiers who saw an opportunity to make money. Digicell and CWC are the most obvious telecoms buyers in the region, but Digicell (which decided not to bid in the last auction) is purely a cellular operator. CWC is one of the few entities that does everything BTC does throughout the region and has a strategic reason to invest for the long-term. And since CWC has been interested in the Bahamas for the last 15 years, how can it suddenly be suspicious when they step up to the plate?
It is easy to research a large global business like Cable & Wireless, which may have problems in some areas but a very healthy balance sheet overall. In fact, CWC is a leader in all regional markets except Jamaica where they are second. It should also be noted that, although declining to participate in the most recent auction due to an internal reorganisation, CWC eventually went through the same entry process as all other bidders.
As for the terms of the CWC agreement, it is a fact that all the bidders required BTC's unfunded pension deficit to be covered by government - including Bluewater. How can this now be "repugnant" to the PLP, when they agreed to pay off the full deficit and close the pension plan entirely. I would suggest that there is no business in the world where employees make zero contributions to their own pensions while the employer pays 20 per cent of salaries into a fund. This obviously has a huge impact on BTC's value.
It is also true that all the bidders - including Bluewater - demanded a management fee in their plans, something which some commentators find egregious. The rationale for the fee that was eventually agreed is that CWC brings a lot of added value to BTC in terms of technology and intellectual property, which will significantly benefit the other shareholder. This is normal practice where a minority partner is involved, and industry benchmarks are used to set the fee scale.
Clearly, connecting the dots selectively amounts to spouting propaganda. It does nothing to help people reach a genuine understanding of the issues. This is known as pinpointing the enemy - simplifying a complex situation by presenting a specific group or person as the enemy in a clear-cut choice between right and wrong. And the better informed you are, the less susceptible you will be to this type of propaganda.
One of the worst allegations in this saga was made recently by PLP Chairman Bradley Roberts (who was the minister responsible for BTC in the Christie administration). He accused current BTC chairman Julian Francis of a corrupt conflict of interest in awarding to Providence Advisors (a financial services company which Francis also chairs) a lucrative contract to manage part of the BTC pension fund.
"As a result of this contract that Julian Francis awarded to himself, he positioned himself and Providence Advisors Ltd to be paid in excess of $400,000 per annum for the past 3 years," Roberts said. "The PLP calls for Julian Francis' immediate resignation and for the police to commence investigations..."
The facts are that efforts to place BTC pension funds with local investment managers began in 2006 under the Christie administration, when Greg Bethel was BTC chairman and also president of Fidelity Bank & Trust - one of the firms chasing the business. Providence, headed by Kenwood Kerr, was also invited to bid, and was eventually approved (along with Fidelity and CFAL) in a process guided by the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche.
The actual contract was not executed until after the 2007 general election, and Francis (who is not a Providence shareholder) had nothing to do with choosing the investment managers. And Providence's fees over the past two and a half years were less than $350,000.
Statements from political operatives and unsupported extrapolations by sympathetic or thoughtless journalists are not the only forms of propaganda we must watch out for. There are also those entities which pose as legitimate news media. While party newspapers or radio broadcasts may be easily identified and their information taken with a grain of salt, some propaganda outlets try to disguise their true nature to fool an audience into believing they are presenting valid information.
The current prime example locally is the online propaganda outlet known as Bahamas Press, which refuses to even acknowledge that it is financed, owned and operated by real people, although it classifies itself as a "leading news website." An anonymous responder claimed the site is owned "by the people of the Bahamas."
As George Orwell wrote in his novel 1984, "the process (of mass-media deception) has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt."
Of course, now that I have waded into the propaganda swamp, I must be part of the conspiracy, right? Well, now you can make the call.
What do you think?
Send comments to
larry@tribunemedia.net
Or visit www.bahamapundit.com
March 09, 2011
tribune242
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
The Odd Protest against the Sale of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC)
Protest against the sale of the BTC is odd
By RICK LOWE
ACCORDING to news reports, 800 to 1,000 people blocked Bay Street last week to protest the sale of BTC to Cable and Wireless/LIME and it all seems odd.
Some people were saying that rights are being violated by selling BTC. But what rights are being violated?
Yes, sometimes Mr. Ingraham can be brash, but does that mean he is uncaring, a dictator, or corrupt, or violating rights as alleged? It's doubtful.
Using emotive language and trying to rile people up as some are doing could violate rights for sure.
What the protesters are missing is BTC is not owned by Bahamians. That's an illusion. A political construct. It is owned by the Bahamas Government.
Over the years successive governments have led us down the garden path by wasting and borrowing beyond the country's ability to sustain, and the sale of BTC might help keep the Bahamian dollar stable and reduce some of the debt that we all have to pay one way or the other.
The Opposition seems shameless on this one, after trying to sell BTC themselves under similar circumstances to a company called Bluewater, now it would seem that some are trying to incite people.
Another turnabout by the Opposition was the Constitutional Referendum of 2002. Both parties agreed in principle in the House of Assembly, then one campaigned against it, confusing the electorate.
The latest reason not to sell is there are complaints about LIME posted on the Internet.
If you research every company in the world online it seems you will find bad comments. We survey some of our clients, and last quarter we had an 84 per cent approval rating (our goal is 85 per cent), but the one client that complained, really complained, bringing the results of all the good comments lower. Is that what is happening with CWC? We also find that often it's people with complaints that fill the survey out. Those that had no issues, do not take the time to respond.
Are there similar complaints about BTC going around on the Internet?
Could the government have been more open? No doubt. Both the FNM or PLP governments over the years could have been more open. Promises of a Freedom of Information Act have been made by each of them. Let's see who passes it into law. That might help with government transparency in the future.
There were apparently no dissenenters before BTC was sold, at least publicly. So why the dissent now? The government corporations should be sold if for nothing more than to get politics and politicians out of it.
All this protesting is odd. When you dig a little deeper unseemly politics appear to be at work?
March 01, 2011
tribune242
By RICK LOWE
ACCORDING to news reports, 800 to 1,000 people blocked Bay Street last week to protest the sale of BTC to Cable and Wireless/LIME and it all seems odd.
Some people were saying that rights are being violated by selling BTC. But what rights are being violated?
Yes, sometimes Mr. Ingraham can be brash, but does that mean he is uncaring, a dictator, or corrupt, or violating rights as alleged? It's doubtful.
Using emotive language and trying to rile people up as some are doing could violate rights for sure.
What the protesters are missing is BTC is not owned by Bahamians. That's an illusion. A political construct. It is owned by the Bahamas Government.
Over the years successive governments have led us down the garden path by wasting and borrowing beyond the country's ability to sustain, and the sale of BTC might help keep the Bahamian dollar stable and reduce some of the debt that we all have to pay one way or the other.
The Opposition seems shameless on this one, after trying to sell BTC themselves under similar circumstances to a company called Bluewater, now it would seem that some are trying to incite people.
Another turnabout by the Opposition was the Constitutional Referendum of 2002. Both parties agreed in principle in the House of Assembly, then one campaigned against it, confusing the electorate.
The latest reason not to sell is there are complaints about LIME posted on the Internet.
If you research every company in the world online it seems you will find bad comments. We survey some of our clients, and last quarter we had an 84 per cent approval rating (our goal is 85 per cent), but the one client that complained, really complained, bringing the results of all the good comments lower. Is that what is happening with CWC? We also find that often it's people with complaints that fill the survey out. Those that had no issues, do not take the time to respond.
Are there similar complaints about BTC going around on the Internet?
Could the government have been more open? No doubt. Both the FNM or PLP governments over the years could have been more open. Promises of a Freedom of Information Act have been made by each of them. Let's see who passes it into law. That might help with government transparency in the future.
There were apparently no dissenenters before BTC was sold, at least publicly. So why the dissent now? The government corporations should be sold if for nothing more than to get politics and politicians out of it.
All this protesting is odd. When you dig a little deeper unseemly politics appear to be at work?
March 01, 2011
tribune242
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
The opposition Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) cries shame on The Bahamas government for accepting an offer that is clearly below market value for the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC)
BTC political row worsens
By CANDIA DAMES
The Nassau Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Parties hit out over $210M deal
The sparring over the government’s decision to sell 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) has intensified, with the two major political parties arguing over whether the majority of Bahamians support the deal.
The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) said yesterday that its parliamentary caucus has embarked on a thorough and comprehensive review of the BTC and CWC transaction, and will be releasing regular positions on each component of the transaction.
“The PLP has clear and unequivocal objections to the commercial terms of this transaction, and more specifically the purchase price and consideration the government, and the Bahamian people, will realize from the sale of this prized national asset,” the party said in a statement.
The government has agreed to sell 51 percent of the shares of BTC to CWC for $210 million plus taxes.
“However, when one looks more closely at the terms of the transaction as set out in the share purchase agreement, it is clear The Bahamas government is receiving far less than $210 million, and it is equally clear that whatever the government eventually receives is far less than the value of 51 percent of BTC,” the PLP claimed.
“The Bahamas government is obligated to leave at least $15 million in cash in the company. Furthermore, The Bahamas government is obligated to fund pension liabilities in the amount of $39 million. Taking into account these obligations of the Bahamian government, the most the government will receive is $156 million for 51 percent of BTC.
“The PLP objects to this and cries shame on the government for accepting an offer that is clearly below market value for BTC. In fact, the Financial Times pointed out that the $210 million purchase price was below the industry average; certainly $156 million is significantly below market price for 51 percent of BTC.”
Meanwhile, an argument has intensified over the level of support the government has on the privatization issue.
An earlier statement released by Elizabeth MP Ryan Pinder on behalf of the PLP said the party takes exception to the Free National Movement’s practice of “misleading the Bahamian public on the support for the BTC sale to Cable and Wireless.”
“The PLP proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC. The PLP has committed itself to a series of statements and position pieces that will clearly note our objections to the BTC sale, focused on different objections,” Pinder said.
“The PLP is also committed in these releases to educating Bahamians as to the shortfalls of this proposed sale of BTC. The PLP demands that the FNM be honest and straightforward with the Bahamian people on this give away of the people's asset, BTC.”
But the FNM shot back in a statement last night, saying as support for the opposition’s position on the partnership to create a new BTC with Cable and Wireless continues to erode, it has begun to panic and continues to ignore the voices of the majority of Bahamians.
“The opposition says that it ‘proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC’. Rather than proposing, the FNM has taken note of two surveys over the past two weeks which have shown the surge of support for the creation of a new BTC. One survey was conducted by a private group (Consumer Voices Bahamas) the other by one of the dailies,” the FNM said.
The FNM noted that in The Nassau Guardian’s online survey 4,563 people responded. The question was whether respondents supported the PLP’s decision to reject the deal.
“It appears that the voices of these thousands of Bahamians and many others are of no consequence to the PLP, which now seeks to substitute its own faltering position for that of the majority of Bahamians,” the FNM said.
But Pinder said in his statement that a previous FNM release and associated polls “misrepresented” the views of Bahamians.
“The unscientific polls focused on whether privatization was a good idea, and not [the] real issue that concerns the majority of Bahamians, which is whether this sale to Cable and Wireless under the proposed terms tabled in the House of Assembly last week is a good deal,” he said.
The FNM insisted however that support for the deal continues to grow among Bahamians.
“We believe that after the House of Assembly debate on BTC’s future, that many more Bahamians will support the new partnership, as misinformation and incorrect information are countered with the facts, which will shed more light on the fiction promoted by certain narrow interests,” the FNM said.
2/16/2011
thenassauguardian
By CANDIA DAMES
The Nassau Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Parties hit out over $210M deal
The sparring over the government’s decision to sell 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) has intensified, with the two major political parties arguing over whether the majority of Bahamians support the deal.
The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) said yesterday that its parliamentary caucus has embarked on a thorough and comprehensive review of the BTC and CWC transaction, and will be releasing regular positions on each component of the transaction.
“The PLP has clear and unequivocal objections to the commercial terms of this transaction, and more specifically the purchase price and consideration the government, and the Bahamian people, will realize from the sale of this prized national asset,” the party said in a statement.
The government has agreed to sell 51 percent of the shares of BTC to CWC for $210 million plus taxes.
“However, when one looks more closely at the terms of the transaction as set out in the share purchase agreement, it is clear The Bahamas government is receiving far less than $210 million, and it is equally clear that whatever the government eventually receives is far less than the value of 51 percent of BTC,” the PLP claimed.
“The Bahamas government is obligated to leave at least $15 million in cash in the company. Furthermore, The Bahamas government is obligated to fund pension liabilities in the amount of $39 million. Taking into account these obligations of the Bahamian government, the most the government will receive is $156 million for 51 percent of BTC.
“The PLP objects to this and cries shame on the government for accepting an offer that is clearly below market value for BTC. In fact, the Financial Times pointed out that the $210 million purchase price was below the industry average; certainly $156 million is significantly below market price for 51 percent of BTC.”
Meanwhile, an argument has intensified over the level of support the government has on the privatization issue.
An earlier statement released by Elizabeth MP Ryan Pinder on behalf of the PLP said the party takes exception to the Free National Movement’s practice of “misleading the Bahamian public on the support for the BTC sale to Cable and Wireless.”
“The PLP proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC. The PLP has committed itself to a series of statements and position pieces that will clearly note our objections to the BTC sale, focused on different objections,” Pinder said.
“The PLP is also committed in these releases to educating Bahamians as to the shortfalls of this proposed sale of BTC. The PLP demands that the FNM be honest and straightforward with the Bahamian people on this give away of the people's asset, BTC.”
But the FNM shot back in a statement last night, saying as support for the opposition’s position on the partnership to create a new BTC with Cable and Wireless continues to erode, it has begun to panic and continues to ignore the voices of the majority of Bahamians.
“The opposition says that it ‘proposes that the majority of Bahamians are against this specific sale of BTC’. Rather than proposing, the FNM has taken note of two surveys over the past two weeks which have shown the surge of support for the creation of a new BTC. One survey was conducted by a private group (Consumer Voices Bahamas) the other by one of the dailies,” the FNM said.
The FNM noted that in The Nassau Guardian’s online survey 4,563 people responded. The question was whether respondents supported the PLP’s decision to reject the deal.
“It appears that the voices of these thousands of Bahamians and many others are of no consequence to the PLP, which now seeks to substitute its own faltering position for that of the majority of Bahamians,” the FNM said.
But Pinder said in his statement that a previous FNM release and associated polls “misrepresented” the views of Bahamians.
“The unscientific polls focused on whether privatization was a good idea, and not [the] real issue that concerns the majority of Bahamians, which is whether this sale to Cable and Wireless under the proposed terms tabled in the House of Assembly last week is a good deal,” he said.
The FNM insisted however that support for the deal continues to grow among Bahamians.
“We believe that after the House of Assembly debate on BTC’s future, that many more Bahamians will support the new partnership, as misinformation and incorrect information are countered with the facts, which will shed more light on the fiction promoted by certain narrow interests,” the FNM said.
2/16/2011
thenassauguardian
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
BTC unions lose court battle to block the sale of 51 % stake in Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC)... [Ordered to pay costs]
BTC unions lose court battle
By KEVA LIGHTBOURNE
Guardian Senior Reporter
kdl@nasguard.com
Supreme Court Justice Neville Adderley yesterday threw out a court action filed by Bahamas Telecommunications Company unions seeking to block the sale of a 51 percent stake in BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC).
The Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) and the Bahamas Communications and Public Managers Union (BCPMU) were seeking an injunction to stop the government from selling BTC.
Attorney Maurice Glinton, who represented the unions, confirmed to The Nassau Guardian that they plan to appeal the decision. He could not say at the time when the necessary documents would be filed.
In his ruling, Adderley said the BCPOU and BCPMU and their trustees lacked the legal capacity to institute and maintain the action in their own names.
“Hence the action is a nullity and so the granting of an injunction pending its hearing does not arise,” Adderley said.
“Alternatively, the evidence has not disclosed that any of their private legal rights are being infringed or threatened or need to be enforced or declared, as they have not established an interest recognized by law as being direct and substantial enough in the subject matter of the action to give them locus standi to commence the action to claim the remedies set forth in the writ.
“For the foregoing reasons, I strike out the writ and dismiss the action.”
Adderley also ordered that the unions pay costs in the matter.
In their writ, the unions contended that the government has no authority to sell BTC because an act of Parliament made the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation (BaTelCo) a self-owning and self-sustaining entity.
Their claim is that consequently the divested assets are now held by BTC in trust for BaTelCo.
Adderley said there is no express power in the Industrial Relations Act that gives unions the capacity or power to sue for declarations outside their statutory objects.
Adderley said even if they had the capacity to sue for the matters in question, he considered whether they had a legal interest to sue for the relief claimed.
Last week, the government signed a shareholder’s agreement and a share purchase agreement with CWC, and Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham tabled the memorandum of understanding between the two entities in the House of Assembly along with related documents.
Yesterday, BCPOU President Bernard Evans said the ruling has in no way halted the union’s efforts to stop the sale of BTC.
“We never really rested all of our efforts on this court case, even though we knew we had good grounds and it is a landmark case. But we never wanted to leave any stone unturned. We will continue to do our stuff because this is not over by a long shot,” Evans said.
“We are going to fight this on all fronts. Whatever it takes, we are going to take our time and get to it.”
Evans shot down claims by the Free National Movement that the majority of Bahamians support the sale of BTC to Cable and Wireless.
“I saw in the paper where the FNM government believe that they have the majority of the people, they keep putting us in the minority. Well the day of reckoning is coming when we will know who has the majority,” Evans said.
The deal between the government and CWC calls for the shares to be sold for $210 million, as well as a stamp duty of $7 million. Eventually, 25 percent of the shares in the company will be offered to Bahamians, the government has said.
2/15/2011
thenassauguardian
By KEVA LIGHTBOURNE
Guardian Senior Reporter
kdl@nasguard.com
Supreme Court Justice Neville Adderley yesterday threw out a court action filed by Bahamas Telecommunications Company unions seeking to block the sale of a 51 percent stake in BTC to Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC).
The Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) and the Bahamas Communications and Public Managers Union (BCPMU) were seeking an injunction to stop the government from selling BTC.
Attorney Maurice Glinton, who represented the unions, confirmed to The Nassau Guardian that they plan to appeal the decision. He could not say at the time when the necessary documents would be filed.
In his ruling, Adderley said the BCPOU and BCPMU and their trustees lacked the legal capacity to institute and maintain the action in their own names.
“Hence the action is a nullity and so the granting of an injunction pending its hearing does not arise,” Adderley said.
“Alternatively, the evidence has not disclosed that any of their private legal rights are being infringed or threatened or need to be enforced or declared, as they have not established an interest recognized by law as being direct and substantial enough in the subject matter of the action to give them locus standi to commence the action to claim the remedies set forth in the writ.
“For the foregoing reasons, I strike out the writ and dismiss the action.”
Adderley also ordered that the unions pay costs in the matter.
In their writ, the unions contended that the government has no authority to sell BTC because an act of Parliament made the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation (BaTelCo) a self-owning and self-sustaining entity.
Their claim is that consequently the divested assets are now held by BTC in trust for BaTelCo.
Adderley said there is no express power in the Industrial Relations Act that gives unions the capacity or power to sue for declarations outside their statutory objects.
Adderley said even if they had the capacity to sue for the matters in question, he considered whether they had a legal interest to sue for the relief claimed.
Last week, the government signed a shareholder’s agreement and a share purchase agreement with CWC, and Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham tabled the memorandum of understanding between the two entities in the House of Assembly along with related documents.
Yesterday, BCPOU President Bernard Evans said the ruling has in no way halted the union’s efforts to stop the sale of BTC.
“We never really rested all of our efforts on this court case, even though we knew we had good grounds and it is a landmark case. But we never wanted to leave any stone unturned. We will continue to do our stuff because this is not over by a long shot,” Evans said.
“We are going to fight this on all fronts. Whatever it takes, we are going to take our time and get to it.”
Evans shot down claims by the Free National Movement that the majority of Bahamians support the sale of BTC to Cable and Wireless.
“I saw in the paper where the FNM government believe that they have the majority of the people, they keep putting us in the minority. Well the day of reckoning is coming when we will know who has the majority,” Evans said.
The deal between the government and CWC calls for the shares to be sold for $210 million, as well as a stamp duty of $7 million. Eventually, 25 percent of the shares in the company will be offered to Bahamians, the government has said.
2/15/2011
thenassauguardian
Saturday, February 12, 2011
We are absolutely convinced that the Bahamian people [private and public] should have been allowed to retain majority control of BTC
Those In Opposition to a Deal
The Bahama Journal Editorial
There are times in life when principle kicks in and when you do what you must do based on what conscience dictates.
Today we reiterate our opposition to what seems a deal well on its way toward being signed, sealed and delivered.
If things go as the current administration has planned, Cable and Wireless will – in short order – take possession of the majority stake in the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation.
Clearly, then, this will not be the end of the matter concerning this corporation, Cable and Wireless and all of what went into making this deal a signed reality.
As the public has been told, there will be continuing opposition to the deal by Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition and from any number of unions.
Opposition Leader Perry Christie has already indicated that [in the event that his party prevails in the next general elections] he would renegotiate the terms of the BTC sale.
This is his and their right.
In addition, some of the unions are adamant that there should be no deal; with one union leader grandly proclaiming that he and his followers are preparing to make of Rawson Square and its environs some sort of Little Egypt.
While hyperbole might have its place in social life; we counsel caution when it comes to making pronouncements that might be construed as being of an incendiary nature.
There is today every likelihood that, this issue will continue to be debated, mulled and chewed over as part of whatever passes for debate preceding that date when the Bahamian people will vote in free and fair elections.
In and of itself, this is all part of the way we do things in a democratic, law-abiding nation; A deal is a deal and as some of us know, a deal becomes a very real deal once it is signed, sealed and delivered.
The details of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the government and Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) for the sale and privatisation of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) has [ finally] been revealed by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.
As we also know, the government is on tap to sell 51 per cent of BTC to CWC for $210 million. Barring some perfectly unforeseen occurrence, this deal will be consummated.
Whether it should be so completed is another question altogether, or as it might be put colloquially, this aspect of the matter is surely a horse of a different colour.
As regards the deal that will be consummated, there is now agreement as regards how C&W will work with the government and the management of BTC to finalize a business plan for BTC; this as movement is made towards addressing its plan for the modernization of telecommunications throughout The Bahamas.
This deal should have been dealt with differently. In addition, we are absolutely convinced that the Bahamian people [private and public] should have been allowed to retain majority control of BTC.
We know that we are not alone in this view.
As we counseled on another occasion, "… all Bahamians who are patriots should rise – as if they were one man- in opposition to any deal that would deny the Bahamian people majority control of entities such as BTC…"
Indeed, like so very many other Bahamians who disagree with the current administration’s on that matter which involves giving Cable and Wireless a 51% per cent stake in BTC, we do so based on our studied conclusion that this deal is not in the best interests of either BTC or the Bahamian people.
We rush to assure the public that our difference with the current administration has next to nothing to do with any position that might seem to be –at least on first blush- barking up the same tree.
That other Bahamians are so minded only reminds us that, there are times in life when an administration can be out of touch with a socially [and perhaps, politically significant bloc of opinion.
While some who oppose the deal may be doing so because they fear some of its implications and ramifications, moving forward, we are where we are based on principle.
In the ultimate analysis, then, this is as good as any a basis on which we wish to stand firm.
Out of firmness comes character.
February 10, 2011
The Bahama Journal Editorial
The Bahama Journal Editorial
There are times in life when principle kicks in and when you do what you must do based on what conscience dictates.
Today we reiterate our opposition to what seems a deal well on its way toward being signed, sealed and delivered.
If things go as the current administration has planned, Cable and Wireless will – in short order – take possession of the majority stake in the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation.
Clearly, then, this will not be the end of the matter concerning this corporation, Cable and Wireless and all of what went into making this deal a signed reality.
As the public has been told, there will be continuing opposition to the deal by Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition and from any number of unions.
Opposition Leader Perry Christie has already indicated that [in the event that his party prevails in the next general elections] he would renegotiate the terms of the BTC sale.
This is his and their right.
In addition, some of the unions are adamant that there should be no deal; with one union leader grandly proclaiming that he and his followers are preparing to make of Rawson Square and its environs some sort of Little Egypt.
While hyperbole might have its place in social life; we counsel caution when it comes to making pronouncements that might be construed as being of an incendiary nature.
There is today every likelihood that, this issue will continue to be debated, mulled and chewed over as part of whatever passes for debate preceding that date when the Bahamian people will vote in free and fair elections.
In and of itself, this is all part of the way we do things in a democratic, law-abiding nation; A deal is a deal and as some of us know, a deal becomes a very real deal once it is signed, sealed and delivered.
The details of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the government and Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) for the sale and privatisation of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) has [ finally] been revealed by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.
As we also know, the government is on tap to sell 51 per cent of BTC to CWC for $210 million. Barring some perfectly unforeseen occurrence, this deal will be consummated.
Whether it should be so completed is another question altogether, or as it might be put colloquially, this aspect of the matter is surely a horse of a different colour.
As regards the deal that will be consummated, there is now agreement as regards how C&W will work with the government and the management of BTC to finalize a business plan for BTC; this as movement is made towards addressing its plan for the modernization of telecommunications throughout The Bahamas.
This deal should have been dealt with differently. In addition, we are absolutely convinced that the Bahamian people [private and public] should have been allowed to retain majority control of BTC.
We know that we are not alone in this view.
As we counseled on another occasion, "… all Bahamians who are patriots should rise – as if they were one man- in opposition to any deal that would deny the Bahamian people majority control of entities such as BTC…"
Indeed, like so very many other Bahamians who disagree with the current administration’s on that matter which involves giving Cable and Wireless a 51% per cent stake in BTC, we do so based on our studied conclusion that this deal is not in the best interests of either BTC or the Bahamian people.
We rush to assure the public that our difference with the current administration has next to nothing to do with any position that might seem to be –at least on first blush- barking up the same tree.
That other Bahamians are so minded only reminds us that, there are times in life when an administration can be out of touch with a socially [and perhaps, politically significant bloc of opinion.
While some who oppose the deal may be doing so because they fear some of its implications and ramifications, moving forward, we are where we are based on principle.
In the ultimate analysis, then, this is as good as any a basis on which we wish to stand firm.
Out of firmness comes character.
February 10, 2011
The Bahama Journal Editorial
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Dion Foulkes - Minister of Labour accuses BCPOU President Bernard Evans of promoting social unrest and seeking to destabilize the government and the economy of The Bahamas
Unions promoting 'social unrest'
By KEVA LIGHTBOURNE
Guardian Senior Reporter
kdl@nasguard.com
Labour minister hits out over 'small Egypt' comment
Minister of Labour Dion Foulkes has accused Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) President Bernard Evans of promoting social unrest and seeking to destabilize the government and the economy.
It came after Evans on Tuesday threatened to turn The Bahamas into a “small Egypt” as a result of the government signing a deal with Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) to purchase a majority interest in the Bahamas Telecommunications Company.
“The security of thousands of Bahamian jobs depends on political and social stability,” Foulkes said in a statement released by the Free National Movement Communication Unit.
The labor minister urged Evans to withdraw his “offensive comment and apologize to the Bahamian people.”
But Evans said yesterday, “I will do no such thing.
“What I said was those persons in Egypt who rose up against oppression, against a dictatorial type of governance, were very peaceful in the beginning when they started. It was only [in] the latter days when the armed forces and/or proponents of (Egyptian President Hosni) Mubarak started to [have] confrontations with those persons that it became out of hand.”
On Tuesday, as he stood on the steps of the Churchill Building, Evans warned of industrial action.
“I see now the police are putting up barricades again as if they are preparing for animals, but the will of the people is the strength of the people,” he said at the time.
“I guess if The Bahamas is ready and if the government is ready to see a small Egypt, then they are going to get it.”
Yesterday, Evans added that by nature, Bahamians are very peaceful people.
“I have always been very cordial and very peaceful, so I don’t know why the minister would want to insinuate that we are trying to wreak havoc on the community or on this nation. Nothing could be further from the truth,” Evans said.
Blasting the “small Egypt” comment, Foulkes noted that many people were killed and hundreds injured in Egypt in recent weeks.
“To urge members of the BCPOU to engage in similar behavior in The Bahamas is unbecoming of a union leader,” he said.
Evans — who has been threatening industrial unrest for weeks — went a step further on Tuesday, apologizing to the Bahamian public for the disruption in services he said will come.
2/10/2011
thenassauguardian
By KEVA LIGHTBOURNE
Guardian Senior Reporter
kdl@nasguard.com
Labour minister hits out over 'small Egypt' comment
Minister of Labour Dion Foulkes has accused Bahamas Communications and Public Officers Union (BCPOU) President Bernard Evans of promoting social unrest and seeking to destabilize the government and the economy.
It came after Evans on Tuesday threatened to turn The Bahamas into a “small Egypt” as a result of the government signing a deal with Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) to purchase a majority interest in the Bahamas Telecommunications Company.
“The security of thousands of Bahamian jobs depends on political and social stability,” Foulkes said in a statement released by the Free National Movement Communication Unit.
The labor minister urged Evans to withdraw his “offensive comment and apologize to the Bahamian people.”
But Evans said yesterday, “I will do no such thing.
“What I said was those persons in Egypt who rose up against oppression, against a dictatorial type of governance, were very peaceful in the beginning when they started. It was only [in] the latter days when the armed forces and/or proponents of (Egyptian President Hosni) Mubarak started to [have] confrontations with those persons that it became out of hand.”
On Tuesday, as he stood on the steps of the Churchill Building, Evans warned of industrial action.
“I see now the police are putting up barricades again as if they are preparing for animals, but the will of the people is the strength of the people,” he said at the time.
“I guess if The Bahamas is ready and if the government is ready to see a small Egypt, then they are going to get it.”
Yesterday, Evans added that by nature, Bahamians are very peaceful people.
“I have always been very cordial and very peaceful, so I don’t know why the minister would want to insinuate that we are trying to wreak havoc on the community or on this nation. Nothing could be further from the truth,” Evans said.
Blasting the “small Egypt” comment, Foulkes noted that many people were killed and hundreds injured in Egypt in recent weeks.
“To urge members of the BCPOU to engage in similar behavior in The Bahamas is unbecoming of a union leader,” he said.
Evans — who has been threatening industrial unrest for weeks — went a step further on Tuesday, apologizing to the Bahamian public for the disruption in services he said will come.
2/10/2011
thenassauguardian
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) business plan outlines 36% reduction in per-minute phone rates within three years
Lower phone rates for BTC customers
By STEWART MILLER
Guardian Business Reporter
stewart@nasguard.com
CWC business plan outlines 36% reduction in three years
BTC customers can expect to see a 36 percent reduction in per-minute phone rates within three years of Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) taking control of the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation (BTC), but the price reductions should commence within the first year.
Prime Minister Hubert A. Ingraham tabled the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the government and CWC in the House yesterday, which outlined the commitments between the two parties.
During his communication, the prime minister disclosed key aspects of CWC’s five-year business plan, submitted by CWC as one of the requirements of the MOU. Several matters directly related to customer costs were addressed in the business plan.
“CWC’s plans will reduce the present rates significantly within the next three years, starting with the first year of operations here in The Bahamas,” Ingraham said, later adding, “It is not just about price reductions. It is also about value for money. We expect consumers and businesses in The Bahamas to be pleased with a new array of products and services that CWC will introduce — that is to say, more services for less cost.”
Around noon yesterday, ahead of the tabling of the MOU, the government and Cable and Wireless signed a share purchase agreement and shareholders agreement governing the terms of CWC’s acquisition of 51 percent of the shares of BTC for a consideration of $210 million plus $7 million stamp tax. During that signing, the prime minister said that the completion of the transaction is expected to occur around the end of March 2011. CWC would then take responsibility for the management and operation of BTC under terms defined in the shareholders agreement.
Under the CWC business plan, BTC customers within The Bahamas calling the Family Islands will no longer have to pay long distance charges when using a mobile-to-mobile connection. There will also be a simplification of billing schedules. The practice of charging different prices for cellular services based on the time of day the call is made will also be eliminated under the business plan.
CWC’s five-year plan also promises ‘reasonable prices’ for smartphones, such as the Blackberry, Android and iPhone. Customers using smartphones will also be able to take fuller advantage of features such as mobile banking, television, and other types of content delivery.
The plan also outlined a number of additional improvements, including better roaming arrangements, faster broadband, more connectivity, consolidated billing, Pay TV, and increased outlets to access BTC services. The prime minister said these would be delivered “while achieving an up to 36% reduction in the cost per minute of both prepaid and postpaid services over the next three years, before cellular competition begins.”
2/9/2011
thenassauguardian
By STEWART MILLER
Guardian Business Reporter
stewart@nasguard.com
CWC business plan outlines 36% reduction in three years
BTC customers can expect to see a 36 percent reduction in per-minute phone rates within three years of Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) taking control of the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation (BTC), but the price reductions should commence within the first year.
Prime Minister Hubert A. Ingraham tabled the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the government and CWC in the House yesterday, which outlined the commitments between the two parties.
During his communication, the prime minister disclosed key aspects of CWC’s five-year business plan, submitted by CWC as one of the requirements of the MOU. Several matters directly related to customer costs were addressed in the business plan.
“CWC’s plans will reduce the present rates significantly within the next three years, starting with the first year of operations here in The Bahamas,” Ingraham said, later adding, “It is not just about price reductions. It is also about value for money. We expect consumers and businesses in The Bahamas to be pleased with a new array of products and services that CWC will introduce — that is to say, more services for less cost.”
Around noon yesterday, ahead of the tabling of the MOU, the government and Cable and Wireless signed a share purchase agreement and shareholders agreement governing the terms of CWC’s acquisition of 51 percent of the shares of BTC for a consideration of $210 million plus $7 million stamp tax. During that signing, the prime minister said that the completion of the transaction is expected to occur around the end of March 2011. CWC would then take responsibility for the management and operation of BTC under terms defined in the shareholders agreement.
Under the CWC business plan, BTC customers within The Bahamas calling the Family Islands will no longer have to pay long distance charges when using a mobile-to-mobile connection. There will also be a simplification of billing schedules. The practice of charging different prices for cellular services based on the time of day the call is made will also be eliminated under the business plan.
CWC’s five-year plan also promises ‘reasonable prices’ for smartphones, such as the Blackberry, Android and iPhone. Customers using smartphones will also be able to take fuller advantage of features such as mobile banking, television, and other types of content delivery.
The plan also outlined a number of additional improvements, including better roaming arrangements, faster broadband, more connectivity, consolidated billing, Pay TV, and increased outlets to access BTC services. The prime minister said these would be delivered “while achieving an up to 36% reduction in the cost per minute of both prepaid and postpaid services over the next three years, before cellular competition begins.”
2/9/2011
thenassauguardian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)