The lingering legacy of the transatlantic slave trade and chattel slavery in Caribbean societies

 World Structure May Not Bring Reparations Justice

By RUPERT MISSICK Jr:

THE Caribbean’s claim for reparations over “the lingering legacy of the Atlantic slave trade” is so fundamental to the current world structure that there may be no real, just way to respond, social anthropologist and College of the Bahamas professor Dr Nicolette Bethel told The Tribune.

CARICOM maintains that Caribbean societies have been built upon transatlantic slave trading and chattel slavery. It encouraged the slave-owning nations of Europe – principally Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark – to engage Caribbean governments in reparatory dialogue to address the “living legacies of these crimes”.

This dialogue took place on a smaller level recently in one of Dr Bethel’s classes at COB. She was joined by Dr Gilbert Morris who discussed with the students, via Skype, among other things, the legal foundations of a reparations claim.

Dr Bethel said she invited Dr Morris to lecture her class because she and Dr Morris have different positions on the question of reparations.

“The students need to know that scholars don’t always agree and need to learn how to think for themselves,” she said.

One of the issues surrounding the debate is the question of whether it is possible or even realistic to believe that reparations could take the form of dollars and cents.

Dr Bethel believes the debate should involve both the tangible and intangible.

“For me, the main point is the intangible, immaterial, and fundamental issue – that fundamental issue that when crimes are done to human beings and the world takes note, reparations are paid.

“The fact that people of African and indigenous descent have not been treated the same way suggests that the same lie that was invented to justify the slave trade still holds: that we are somehow less than human, and don’t rate the same respect.

“But the monetary side is also fundamental. The modern capitalist world was built on the forced labour of the people of the ‘new world’ and that debt has yet to be paid.

“Rather than Europe and North America paying back the Caribbean, Caribbean countries’ debts are being multiplied under the current world economic system, which, despite all mouthings to the contrary, is in no way ‘free’, unless the ‘free-ness’ is still free, forced, unwaged, underpaid labour,” Dr Bethel said.

Dr Bethel said that Bahamians have a difficult time addressing the issue of slavery because they were mistaught their history.

“We have deep shame about that history and we have not faced it or discussed it. I think this is by design. We imagine that it might be dangerous to our social relations to do so. Our social relations, whether we talk about the enslavement and dehumanisation of our past or not, are endangered. Perhaps one way of fixing that is to re-humanise us all, and one way of doing that is sitting down and reasoning together,” she said.

Slavery, Dr Bethel said, has created a society in which brutality is still the most accepted way of functioning.

“If we are not brutalising one another in every way, little and big, physical and psychic, we wish to brutalise those people on whom we place the label of ‘brute’ – our poor, our disempowered, the criminals.

“The institution of slavery dehumanised everyone, no matter what their origin. The process of beating down the enslaved dehumanised the enslavers. We have only to look at how we have designed our city and our public institutions to understand that we don’t really believe in our full humanity, our people-ness yet,” Dr Bethel said.

While there are many who feel something should happen in terms of reparations, it is doubtful that anything will.

One recent reparation claim levied against Lloyds of London in 2004 by a coalition of Rastafarian groups argued that European countries formerly involved in the slave trade, especially Britain, should pay 72.5 billion pounds to resettle 500,000 Jamaican Rastafarians in Africa.

The claim was rejected by the British government, which said it could not be held accountable for wrongs in past centuries.

So, in a perfect world, how should the Caribbean’s claim for reparations be answered?

Dr Bethel says she doesn’t know but feels that the Caribbean’s claim is so fundamental to the current world structure that there is no real, just way to respond.

“...So I cannot imagine a perfect world. However, let us look at what the Caribbean, what the new world lacks: we lack a real, fundamental connection to and agreement that our humanity is worth celebrating.

“What we lack is the luxury of spending money on things we deem ‘unnecessary’ but which are critical for the development of democratic and civil society, and that is what we need now.

“A fund for the creation of that kind of infrastructure? I don’t know. A return of all that we have lost – all our ancestral knowledge, our ancestral civilities? Can they be returned? Can they be rebuilt? Can we fund the healing that is necessary?

“Even if it is not possible, the gesture, the foundation, the funding must be provided somehow, somewhere, now,” she said.

February 04, 2014

Tribune 242

Caricom Accepts The Bahamas' Position On CSME

Caricom Accepts Bahamas' Position On CSME

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

8th July 2005

Leaders of the Caribbean Community have accepted the position The Bahamas has taken not to sign onto the Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME) within the next two years and have agreed that this country will continue to play an active role in the regional grouping.

The Bahamas reported on the state of the public debate regarding the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, which establishes the CSME, according to a communique`, issued yesterday following the 26th meeting of the Conference of Heads of Government of the Caribbean Community.

"Member states agreed that in the circumstances of the particular position of The Bahamas, the status quo of its present relationship and involvement in Caricom institutions should be maintained," the communique` also said.

When he had been pushing the case for The Bahamas to join the CSME with certain reservations, Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell had insisted that the signing would have maintained the status quo as it relates to The Bahamas' participation in Caricom.

He told The Associated Press in St. Lucia that the debate in The Bahamas over CSME has effectively ended because of the decision taken by the Government of The Bahamas not to sign the Revised Treaty.

It was also something Minister Mitchell reiterated when he spoke with The Bahama Journal yesterday.

"I really don't propose to get into any further debate about this matter," he said.  "It is not an issue which is a live issue for The Bahamas government.  The Bahamian people said they want no further debate on the matter so the debate is over and I won't engage in it."

During the debate, there had been questions regarding what role the country would play in Caricom if it did not sign onto CSME.

Bahamas High Commissioner to Caricom A. Leonard Archer had even suggested at one point that The Bahamas may in fact have to resign from the bloc.  But he had said that that would have depended on the reaction of the heads to this country's decision not to join CSME.

Heads of Government indicated that they understood why the country could not now join the agreement.

According to the communique`, the heads welcomed the fast-track steps taken by Barbados, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago to become Single Market compliant since March 2005, and took note of the "strenuous efforts" being made by all the remaining member states to achieve Single Market treaty-compliance and overall readiness.

"They reflected the constraints which member states faced and the challenges of accelerated integration among states of differing capabilities and competitive strengths, and reaffirmed their commitment to the long-held community principle of special- and differential treatment for the disadvantaged among the member states," the communique` added.

Even though the government has stressed repeatedly that it had planned to secure certain reservations, including the free movement of people, there continued to be widespread fears that The Bahamas would have been flooded with foreign nationals had it signed the agreement.

These kinds of "misconceptions" as they were termed by Minister Mitchell were a part of the reason why the drive to CSME was abandoned.

However, heads addressed the free movement of skilled nationals during this week's summit.

They agreed that Caricom nationals who are entering the Free Movement Regime with a skills certificate issued by a member state other than the receiving state should be allowed to work immediately while their qualifications are verified by the receiving state.

The conference also agreed that the review of proposals for the expansion of the eligible categories of skilled nationals would be completed in time for consideration at the next meeting of the conference.

There were other matters of importance addressed in the final document from the heads meeting.

Regional leaders reviewed developments in the various external trade negotiations in which the region is involved.

"They noted that the rapidly changing international environment was less accommodating of preferential arrangements, such as those that traditionally characterized the region's trade relations," the communique` noted.

"They reiterated the region's commitment to, and active participation in ongoing external trade negotiations, but observed that the current challenges including tardy progress on special and differential treatment for small, vulnerable economies and the general push for reciprocity were beginning to raise uncertainty about the costs and the benefits involved."

Heads also noted that St. Vincent and the Grenadines now joins Suriname, the first member state to issue national passports using the common Caricom format.

Several other member states are expected to introduce the new passport format in 2005 and 2006.  December 2007 has been identified as the timeframe for completing the introduction of the new passport format by all member states.

When he returned from the summit yesterday, Minister Mitchell indicated that this is not a concern for The Bahamas, as it does not intend to follow this same move.

During the summit, heads of government also received a presentation on developments relating to security in the region, according to the communique', which says it was recognized that the issue of security needed to be frontally addressed and effectively tackled in order to maintain sustainable development.

In this regard, they endorsed the Management Framework for Crime and Security, which makes provision for a Council of Ministers responsible for National Security and Law Enforcement to superintend policy direction; a Security Policy Advisory Committee; and an Implementation Agency for Crime and Security.

Fred Mitchell Blasted on the CARICOM Single Market and Economy - CSME Debate

Mitchell Blasted On CSME

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

June 20, 2005

Chairman of the government-appointed Bahamas Financial Services Consultative Forum Brian Moree believes it was unfortunate that Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell deemed it appropriate last week to "impugn and demean" the views and motives of certain persons who opposed his views on the CARICOM Single Market and Economy.

"In doing so the Minister seemed to think that this somehow vindicated his position or strengthened his case on CSME.  I think, with respect, that he was wrong and in doing so he did not enhance his cause or the dignity of his office by resorting to name calling and finger pointing," said Mr. Moree, who also commended the government for "listening to and considering the views of the Bahamian" people on CSME.

During his address one week ago today, Minister Mitchell announced that the government will not be signing the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas within this present term, and lashed out at various individuals who had opposing views on whether the country should join the regional agreement.

Minister Mitchell said that some detractors of the CSME were false prophets who opposed the independence of The Bahamas back in the early 1970's and are now crying crocodile tears over the issue of CSME and an alleged threat to the country's sovereignty.

He also named several people directly, including Mr. Moree, whom he accused of spreading misinformation on the issue.

But Mr. Moree, in his statement issued over the weekend, said, "The simple fact is that the Minister, as the lead spokesman for the government, failed to convince thousands of Bahamians that signing the Revised Treaty was in the national interest of our country.

"If he is unhappy with that position he should not seek solace in lambasting those who did not share his view.  Rather, I respectfully suggest that it would be more constructive for the Minister to focus on the relevant issues and at least countenance the thought that there might be some merit in views other than his own."

Refuting more of what the Minister said in the House of Assembly last week, Mr. Moree added, "I regret that it is necessary to remind the Minister that those of us who do not agree with his assessment of the CSME are not unintelligent, confused, uninformed or misguided.

"My opposition to the CSME is not, and has never been, politically motivated or in any way related to the Minister in his personal capacity.  I repeatedly made the point in my public statements that the CSME is not a political issue and the national debate should proceed on that basis."

Referring to Mr. Moree, Minister Mitchell in his address said that as the chairman of The Bahamas Financial Services Consultative Forum, caused "quite a stir in the community" when his group released an immigration report suggesting that the immigration laws of The Bahamas should be liberalized to allow for more foreign workers to come and work in the financial services sector.

"Now he comes a few months later and says that we must not sign onto the CSME provisions because they would allow the free movement of people," the Minister said.  "I must be missing something here.  What is the principle at stake here?  If you believe in liberalized immigration what problem in principle then do you have with the CARICOM treaty which believes in liberalized immigration?

"But I have to add quickly, the government is not proposing anything to do with the free movement of people.  That reservation is proposed and already agreed.  It is the existing situation and status quo.  But you know never let the truth interfere with a good story."

Mr. Moree also responded to the Minister's comments in this regard.

 "He characterized that report as suggesting that the immigration laws of The Bahamas should be liberalized to allow foreign workers to come and work in our financial services sector," Mr. Moree noted.

"Remarkably, and with no basis in truth, the Minister then boldly attributed to me the position that The Bahamas 'should not sign onto the CSME provisions because they would allow the free movement of people'.

"As I am the chairman of the forum, the Minister ridiculed this position which he attributed to me on the CSME as contradictory to the contents of the report.  The Minister was clearly inferring that I was advancing irreconcilable positions, apparently in an attempt to discredit my opposing view on the CSME.  This is a most convoluted and distorted thought process."

Mr. Moree pointed out that he did not object to the CSME simply because it would allow the free movement of people.

"While that is certainly a legitimate concern for many Bahamians, even considering the reservation in respect of Articles 45 and 46, there were and continues to be many additional well reasoned, thoughtful and principled objections to The Bahamas signing on the CSME.

"Secondly, there is absolutely no inconsistency between supporting the recommendations in the forum's report and the position adopted by me in opposing the CSME.  Specifically, there is no helpful comparison between the narrow liberalization of our immigration policy as it relates to a single sector in selective and targeted areas of specialization on the one hand and the open sesame which (but for the reservation) is envisaged in the Revised Treaty on the other hand whereby ultimately there would be no restrictions on the nationals of 15 different countries moving freely between the member states in a single economic space."

Mr. Moree added, "The Minister should follow his own admonition and avoid subterfuge and confusion when commenting on the CSME.  My views on the CSME as it relates to The Bahamas are based on my consideration of our national interests.

"Presumably the same can be said of the views of the Minister.  No one involved in the debate should claim to have a monopoly on virtue and certainly the national debate is not advanced by denigrating persons who hold a different view or impugning their motives."

In his budget address last week which focused exclusively on the CSME issue, Minister Mitchell also blasted former Ministers Sir William Allen and Zhivargo Laing; Bahamas Public Services Union President John Pinder; attorney, Fred Smith, who heads the Grand Bahama Human Rights Association; and the Nassau Institute. 

There is No Compelling Economic or Political Case for The Bahamas to Join The CARICOM Single Market & Economy CSME in Its Present Form - says Notable Bahamian Attorney, John K. F. Delaney

The Bahamian Public Deserves A Clear Understanding of How The CARICOM Single Market & Economy (CSME) will Impact Their Way of Life

STRAIGHT TALK NEEDED ON CSME

By: John K. F. Delaney
Nassau, The Bahamas

31 May, 2005

THE QUESTION of whether The Bahamas joins the CSME has profound implications for the economic way of life of every Bahamian.  With the Government having decided last December to sign the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas that would commit The Bahamas, it is troubling that there is a persistent lack of clarity or forthrightness by the Government as to the Revised Treaty’s ramifications.

The Government (by Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hon. Fred Mitchell) has stated that The Bahamas will enter reservations in four regards (“the four reservations”), which they claim would prevent the economic side of the Revised Treaty from applying to The Bahamas and keep unchanged the present position of The Bahamas in relation to Caricom.

The four reservations are stated as follows:

1.  Against the free movement of persons (Articles 45 & 46);

2.  Against monetary union;

3.  Against a common external tariff; and

4.  Against the Caribbean Court of Justice on its Appellate side.

Critical questions arising from the Government’s position are:

a)  Do the four reservations constitute the entirety of the so-called “economic side” of the Revised Treaty?

b)  What is the legal effect of a reservation under the Revised Treaty?

The Economic Scope

The most cursory reading of the Revised Treaty would reveal that the economic scope of the Revised Treaty extends far beyond the four reservations.  Barbados Prime Minister Owen Arthur described the comprehensive economic scope of the Revised Treaty as “the respective economies of the Caribbean should be reconstituted through the removal of existing barriers, as a Single Market space in which not only goods, but services, capital, technology, and skilled persons should freely circulate, and Caribbean citizens should enjoy new and unfettered rights of establishment of enterprise anywhere in the region.”

The four reservations relate only to part of the economic effects of the Revised Treaty.  For example, the Revised Treaty requirements for the free movement of capital and goods within the Single Market are not affected by the four reservations.  And the four reservations only partially affect the free movement of persons by relating only to the free movement of workers/employees while not touching or concerning the free movement of self-employed persons.

The Free Movement of Self-employed Persons

Whereas a reservation is proposed against the free movement of workers (Articles 45 & 46), no reservation is proposed against the free movement of self-employed persons (Articles 32, 33, 34, 37 & 44) under the so-called right of establishment.

The Government, by Minister Mitchell, has stated that the right of free movement of self-employed persons is “principally in areas that earn foreign exchange such as hotels, which are already open to foreign investors”.  But that is not what the Revised Treaty states.  The Revised Treaty does not in anyway limit the free movement of self-employed persons.  Indeed, the Government’s own Information Paper (dated October 2004 prepared by His Excellency A. Leonard Archer) contradicts the Honourable Minister in stating as follows:

“The Right of Establishment is a fundamental pillar of the CSME.  This Right permits the National of any Member State of the CSME to establish a business in any other Member State of the CSME on the same basis as would a national born in that Member State.  In other words, a Barbadian Businessman would have the right to establish a business in Jamaica in the same manner that a Jamaican Businessman would establish a business in his native Jamaica.  Similarly, the Jamaican would have the right to establish businesses in Grenada or Trinidad and Tobago in the same manner that nationals of Grenada or Trinidad and Tobago would have” (see pages 20 & 21).

Further, in answer to a question posed in the Information Paper “How will joining the CSME affect those areas of the Bahamian economy reserved for Bahamians?”  the Information Paper further states:

“On joining the CSME, unless The Bahamas obtains reservations on some aspects of Article 33 ‘Removal of Restrictions on the Right of Establishment’, The Bahamas would be expected to allow Single Market firms to enter every part of its domestic market.  Under Article 33, Member States are expected to remove any ‘restriction on the setting up of agencies, branches or subsidiaries by nationals of a Member State in the territory of another Member State’” (see page 38).

The Bahamian public is entitled to plain and direct words from the Government that, by its decision to join the CSME, the Government intends to allow Caricom nationals to operate any business in The Bahamas as self-employed persons on the same basis as any Bahamian.  And, that included are those business areas presently reserved under the National Investment Policy exclusively for Bahamians, namely:

i)  Taxi business,

ii)  Beauty salon or barber shops,

iii)  Auto repair service,

iv)  Fishing,

v)  Retail shops of any kind,

vi)  Wholesale shops of any kind,

vii)  Real estate sales & rental agencies,

viii)  Restaurants (non-specialty), and

ix)  Security service.

The Government should disclose in plain language to the public that CSME would impose an obligation upon The Bahamas to ensure that Caribbean nationals, on the same basis as Bahamians, have access to land, buildings and other property in The Bahamas for their establishment of businesses in The Bahamas (see Article 37).

The Reservations

There is much confusion about the duration of any of the four reservations to parts of the CSME:

Article 237 of the Revised Treaty allows reservations to be entered if other Caricom countries that sign the Revised Treaty would agree.  However, the Revised Treaty does not define the word “reservation” or speak to its duration or legal effect.

·  Minister Mitchell has stated that the reservations would have no time limit unless The Bahamas decides to remove them.

·  The Bahamas Information Paper states that “these reservations could last for twenty years or more” (page 47).

·  A Barbados based CSME specialist has reportedly stated that the proposed reservations would be limited to 5 years and that any extension would require the agreement of Caricom members.

However, even if one agrees with the position of Minister Mitchell on a question of duration, more fundamental is that, as a matter of international law, no state may form a reservation to a treaty if the reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Revised Treaty (Vienna Convention on The Law of Treaties, Article 19).  In this regard, it appears that some if not all of the four reservations directly conflict with the object and purpose of the CSME.  As such, at some point after The Bahamas would have signed to join the CSME in reliance upon four reservations of uncertain effect, The Bahamas may find itself subject to a dispute brought by other Caricom states challenging the reservations.  Therefore, whatever position one takes on the duration of reservations, if they are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Revised Treaty, they may only last until the Caribbean Court of Justice sets them aside.  The CCJ alone shall have jurisdiction to determine the matter.  In this connection it should be clearly understood that the proposed reservation against the CCJ would not and could not prevent the CCJ from having exclusive jurisdiction over CSME disputes concerning The Bahamas.

There is no compelling economic or political case for The Bahamas to join the CSME in its present form.  The four reservations are insufficient and too uncertain to protect the legitimate interests of the people of The Bahamas.  The Bahamas should reject the Revised Treaty and, instead, pursue a bilateral treaty between The Bahamas, on the one hand, and Caricom, on the other, covering such aspects of economic and/or political cooperation as the Bahamian people would find acceptable.

Conclusion

The Bahamian public deserves a clear understanding of how the CSME will impact their way of life.  That understanding requires informed discussion, widely held - in our churches, unions, schools and families, and time for mature consideration.  It is unfortunate that the Government did not choose to invigorate its campaign for the CSME sufficiently in advance of the impending CSME deadline of 31 December 2005.  But Bahamians ought not to be rushed into a bad deal.  An issue so profound as whether to join the CSME could not with moral authority be decided by the Government without it first being put to the people in a referendum or general elections.

Free National Movement (FNM) Leader, Senator Tommy Turnquest - Advises The Bahamas Government not to join the Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME)

FNM Leader Advises Gov't Not To Join CSME

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

24th May 2005

Amid increased debate over the Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME), Free National Movement Leader Senator Tommy Turnquest yesterday set the record straight on the FNM's position on the controversial agreement, saying it is not the same position held by the government.

Mr. Turnquest said it is the FNM's position that The Bahamas should not join the CSME.

He made the comment in an interview with The Bahama Journal on the heels of continued statements made by Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell that the FNM agrees with the government on how to proceed on CSME.

Minister Mitchell indicated recently in a statement that, "the position of the Official Opposition as communicated to the Minister is that they agree, and are at one with the government's position on CSME- provided reservations are obtained for The Bahamas not to participate in the free movement of people; the Caribbean Court of Justice at the appellate level, the single currency and monetary union and the Common External Tariff."

During an address last week to the Abaco Chamber of Commerce, the Minister said, "Both political parties agree with the approach that we have decided with regard to [the CSME].  You will see a lowering of the temperature on this over the next few weeks.  The arguments from the opponents have been exhausted.  You can see this with the lengths of the desperation and invention that are taking place."

But Mr. Turnquest said the Foreign Affairs Minister "ought to desist from saying what he's saying about the Free National Movement" regarding its position on CSME.

While he said that the FNM believes that the government should not sign the agreement, he also indicated that the party supports a referendum on the issue.

In addition, he said- should The Bahamas sign on; it should secure the mentioned reservations.  But Mr. Turnquest ‐ joining a growing chorus ‐ questioned how long the reservations would last.

"We want to be assured that the reservations at some point in the future don't just fall away and we find ourselves automatically becoming a part of this Caribbean union with those tenets being in place," Mr. Turnquest said.

But while on the Love 97 programme "Jones and Company" on Sunday, Minister Mitchell indicated that the reservations would last for as long as a Government of The Bahamas wishes them to.

Mr. Turnquest said yesterday that the FNM's position has "evolved to where we support the position that Bahamians have.  We ought to have a referendum on it."

He said, "There are some theorists or constitutional experts who say that our constitution does not allow for that type of referendum to be held.  We can amend our laws so that the people of The Bahamas have more of a say in this matter.

As far as I am concerned, the people ought to decide.

"I listened to Brian Moree on Jones and Co. [Sunday] when he said if you disagree with five fundamental positions like that, why then join and I wholeheartedly agree with him.  That's exactly what I'm saying."

Mr. Turnquest was asked whether The Bahamas should no longer be a part of Caricom.

"If they are not prepared to accept us as a part of it [then so be it], but I think they would be prepared to have us in terms of the cooperation and other aspects and they would benefit as would we.  I don't see that there are any great benefits to us signing and opting out of the major provisions," he said.

Asked on the show on Sunday if The Bahamas would be axed from Caricom if it does not sign the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, Minister Mitchell declined to give a direct answer.

He did say, however, that, "The great beauty of the Caricom movement is it isn't one of these hard and fast, black and white issues.  The fact is we do participate in all of the organs of the community at the moment, but it is just appropriate for us to be signatories to the treaty.  Everyone else in the community is a signatory to the treaty."

When asked by the show's host, Wendall Jones, whether The Bahamas should sign the treaty, he said, "I believe it should.  In fact, the government decided on the 21st of December last year that we ought to do that subject to obtaining the reservations which we have advanced in the public domain." 

The Raging Debate over the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) continues in The Bahamas

Clash Over CSME

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

23rd May 2005

The raging debate over the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) continued on Sunday as Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell locked horns with a leading attorney over various aspects of the agreement, which has created much furor in recent weeks.

A heated exchange between Minister Mitchell and Brian Moree on the Love 97 programme "Jones and Company" led to the attorney lashing out at the Minister over certain comments he made.

Throughout the show, Minister Mitchell, who at times appeared frustrated over what he termed misinformation on CSME, insisted that there will be no fundamental changes if The Bahamas signs onto to the agreement.

"What I'm saying is, let's not frighten ourselves by saying that there is going to be some fundamental change," he said.

"There is going to be no fundamental change and as for whether the reservations will last, I cannot say.  I can only speak for the Government of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas today."

There continues to be great confusion over whether the reservations the government is seeking will last indefinitely.  Several prominent figures, including Mr. Moree, have insisted that they are merely deferrals.

The government has said that at this time, The Bahamas will not participate in the free movement of people; the Caribbean Court of Justice at the appellate level, the single currency and monetary union, and the Common External Tariff.

Mr. Moree believes it is senseless to join an agreement and opt out of its major fundamental provisions.

"If you look at the literature that comes out of the southern Caribbean on the CSME, it seems to make the point very strongly that the CSME is a pipedream if it does not involve full integration of the peoples of the Caribbean countries," said Moree, who also heads the government-appointed Financial Services.

"There has to be political integration; there has to be full economic union.  When you get there, is perhaps debatable- and whether all countries get there at the same time is perhaps debatable.  The fundamental point is that these reservations do not mean that we are not going to be required to deal with these issues at some point in the future.  Before I get into something, I want to look at the future.  I don't have the luxury of mortgaging my children's future."

But Minister Mitchell shot back, "This emotive language is simply irresponsible."

It's a statement Mr. Moree took exception with.

"Minister, we should keep the level of debate high out of respect for your office," he said. "I am not irresponsible."

"I said the language was irresponsible," Minister Mitchell corrected him.

Mr. Moree responded, "That is a view, Minister...The Government of The Bahamas should listen to its people."

"I am listening to you, Mr. Moree," the Minister said.  "I am saying that if you want to keep the debate responsible we have to deal with the facts and the facts are that there will be no fundamental change."

Mr. Moree fired back, "But that is wrong and very few people agree with you."

Minister Mitchell insisted that that statement was simply incorrect.

"You're talking economic theory," he told Mr. Moree.

"I am talking what the facts are as presented by the Government of The Bahamas.  Those facts are that reservations exist- and there is no timing on those reservations and so the treaty as far as those provisions will apply, will not apply to The Bahamas.  How many times does one have to say [that]?"

Mr. Moree suggested sarcastically that the Minister "holds all wisdom" and is intolerant of anyone who opposes him on CSME.  But Minister Mitchell said this was not the case.

He said signing the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas is "really about our continued participation in CARICOM...What we are doing or proposing is to finish the work of becoming incorporated into CARICOM since the treaty is to come into force at the end of the year and maintaining our position with regard to the status quo as far as our relations with CARICOM is concerned by entering reservations pursuant to Article 237 of the treaty, which really puts us in the same position which we are in now."

The show's host, Wendall Jones, said, "The detractors of this say it makes no sense for The Bahamas to sign on to CSME because fundamentally, the economic side is fundamentally what CSME is all about."

"CARICOM is both political and economic, and the government's case has always been that we're a part of CARICOM for geopolitical reasons- and that now that we have the [Revised] Treaty of Chaguaramas, if we are to be fully a part of CARICOM, we should sign the treaty with the reservations, which will serve our national interest."

Mr. Jones then asked, "Are you suggesting therefore that if we do not sign the treaty then we are not a part of CARICOM or should not be a part of CARICOM?"

The Minister explained that, "The great beauty of the CARICOM movement is it isn't one of these hard and fast, black and white issues.  The fact is we do participate in all of the organs of the community at the moment, but it is just appropriate for us to be signatories to the treaty.  Everyone else in the community is a signatory to the treaty."

He added, "I believe that [the government should sign the treaty].  In fact, the government decided on December 31 that we ought to do that, subject to obtaining the reservations which we have advanced in the public domain."

But Mr. Moree said, "I do not think that The Bahamas should join a single economy with 14 other countries within the region.  That is my primary concern.  I don't think there are compelling economic interests for The Bahamas to join this single economy."

He was echoing sentiments expressed in recent times by former Governor of the Central Bank and former Minister of Finance Sir William Allen, and soon to be former Governor of the Central Bank Julian Francis.

Mr. Moree said, "The reservations that the Minister has indicated I think are very important, but there are many questions as to how long these reservations will continue.  Who will decide when they end?  Do we retain control over making these decisions?  And in any event, what about the right of establishment, which is not currently one of the four reservations?  What is the impact of the freedom of movement of skilled persons... as opposed to the free movement of labour generally?"

The Minister explained, "The right of establishment will not affect the retail and wholesale trades in The Bahamas because the right of establishment has to deal with those areas of the economy which are foreign exchange earners for the particular country.  These sectors include, amongst others, the hotel sector, the manufacturing export sector and some smaller areas like specialty restaurants.

"What right of establishment does is it gives you when you invest in a country the right to bring certain skilled labour to run your establishment.  If you look at the national investment policy of The Bahamas today, all of those areas that I have listed are already areas where foreign investors are able to come and invest in the country and part of the policy is that they are permitted to have the skilled labour to run their companies.  So it balances out."

While the Minister insisted throughout the show that signing the Revised Treaty of Chauguaramas would be merely a political move, Bahamas High Commissioner to CARICOM A. Leonard Archer said recently in an interview with The Bahama Journal that there are many economic benefits that will come if the government signs on to CSME.

Mr. Archer said that by signing the CSME, The Bahamas would see "increased investments and increased trade with the rest of the Caribbean."

Minister Mitchell said in a recent speech that not signing on to the CSME would have serious negative implications for the country's social and economic infrastructure that would set The Bahamas "at a serious disadvantage as a country, rather than enhance our growth and development, in that, our access to the facilities and services provided by the Caribbean Development Bank, the University of the West Indies, the Caribbean Disaster and Emergency Response Agency and others, would be greatly diminished."

"We would be the only country in the Caribbean, apart from Cuba, that would be outside a regional trade bloc; and since trade blocs provide benefits for their members that are not provided to non-members, it could easily be reasoned that our tourism industry, our manufacturing industry, our beleaguered agriculture industry and even our financial services industry would be immediately and negatively affected, largely in terms of the relatively higher cost of doing business in The Bahamas that we would have invited by trying to stand alone," Minister Mitchell said.

The Bahamas Should Not Join the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) - according to Central Bank Governor, Julian Francis

Governor Francis said that CARICOM Central Bank Governors conducted a study on the impact the single currency would have on the region and advised heads of CARICOM that it would not be a feasible move to make

"Why?  Because there isn’t sufficient economic convergence between the countries of CARICOM to sustain a common currency," Mr. Francis said

Governor Against CSME

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

17 May 2005

There is no sound economic reason why The Bahamas should join the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME), according to Governor of the Central Bank Julian Francis.

The show’s host, Wendall Jones, pointed out that, "There are those in the political directorate in The Bahamas as well as in other countries in the Caribbean who would say that if we do not participate in CSME we might as well not be a member of CARICOM."

Mr. Francis said this might very well be true.

"I suppose that in time if we were not to join the CSME my guess is that CARICOM would not see any particular interest in continuing its administrative and political partnership with The Bahamas," he said.

"But to the extent that these things are driven mainly by economic considerations, I would say so be it."

The CSME debate has taken on new life in recent weeks, with several prominent figures coming out in opposition to the agreement.

The growing public outcry coincides with an educational campaign launched by the government and spearheaded by the country’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fred Mitchell.

The government has already said that The Bahamas would request certain reservations before joining CSME.

These include opting out of the free movement of people; the Caribbean Court of Justice at the appellate level, the Common External Tariff, and the single currency and monetary union.

While on the show, Governor Francis said that three years ago, the CARICOM Central Bank governors conducted a study on the impact the single currency would have on the region and advised heads of CARICOM that it would not be a feasible move to make.

"Why?  Because there isn’t sufficient economic convergence between the countries of CARICOM to sustain a common currency," Mr. Francis said.

Asked whether the governors’ view has changed in that regard, he said, "If there has been any change I would say that Trinidad has become a bit further removed from the average of CARICOM economically.  Jamaica also has in a negative sense, and The Bahamas of course has continued its development.

"That leaves the East Caribbean and Barbados.  I don’t think that there has been anything that would have happened which would cause the governors to think differently."

Last week, a former Governor of the Central Bank of The Bahamas also came out strongly against CSME.

In a letter to the editor, Sir William Allen said there is no logical justification for The Bahamas to be a part of this single economic space, "because no one has yet identified one benefit which could only be achieved through our sign-on."

He also said that Minister Mitchell is wrong to equate CSME with the Free Trade Area of The Americas.

"This is the reason it would be helpful for the debate if it were led by a ministry or an institution which has a better understanding of the difference between a free trade area, and a single economic space- and this is not a red herring," Sir William said.

He also said, "The economic divergence between The Bahamas and the rest of the region is of such magnitude that it seems readily accepted that it should be granted temporary exemptions from key provisions of the arrangement defining this common economic space.

"No one, not the Minister nor anyone else, can know how the participation would affect The Bahamas’ economic situation, first- in terms of the impact of the provisions to which it will have to adhere, then in terms of the anticipation of the end of the exemptions it may be granted- and finally in anticipation of where the evolving harmonization within this common economic space may eventually lead."

But Bahamas High Commissioner to CARICOM A. Leonard Archer recently said in an interview with The Bahama Journal that any suggestion that the reservations would be "temporary" and The Bahamas would eventually be forced to adhere to all provisions of CSME is incorrect.

Mr. Archer said that The Bahamas may opt out of certain provisions of CSME for as long as it chooses.

He expressed disappointment that so many prominent and well-educated Bahamians are spreading "misinformation."

Mr. Archer also said The Bahamas would benefit tremendously from joining CSME.

"We are part of a global economy.  We have applied to join [the World Trade Organization].  We have been negotiating the FTAA.  Joining the CSME first provides us with certain advantages of going into WTO and FTAA," he said.

"There are also economic reasons: increased investment in The Bahamas; increased trade with the rest of the Caribbean; we could access goods and services from the Caribbean more cheaply or more economically than we are accessing them now."