Prime Minister Perry Christie says that he was surprised by the results of the January 28, 2013 gambling referendum

Christie Surprised By Gambling Referendum Results

By Sasha Lightbourne
The Bahama Journal







Prime Minister Perry Christie admitted he was surprised by the results of the gambling referendum last week.

Mr. Christie was speaking to reporters before he headed into his weekly Cabinet meeting yesterday.
“Yes I probably was surprised by the outcome in the sense that I thought it would be a much closer election,” he said.

“I was prepared for any outcome and I tried to evidence that. The matter is before the courts now so I won’t speak to that issue but we are prepared for whatever decision is made by the courts.”

Bahamians were asked to vote on two questions – “Do you support the regulation and taxation of web shop gaming” and “Do you support the establishment of a national lottery?”

Prime Minister Christie also refuted the fact that many felt he made a mistake by having the referendum when he did.

“You never make mistakes when you are deepening democracy,” he told reporters.

“I promised before the elections that I would have a referendum. I indicated I had no horse in the race. This thing swirled with controversy and it was what it was. The people voted and I acted upon the vote. It is now a matter for the minister of national security and the attorney general.”

The majority of constituencies across the country voted ‘no’ in both questions.

Up to press time last night 43,393 voted ‘no’ and 28,787 voted ‘yes’.

Bains Town and Grants Town and Centreville were the only constituencies that voted ‘yes’.

According to Acting Parliamentary Commissioner Sherlyn Hall, ballots from some of the constituencies took up to three hours to recount and added that as the figures rolled in it grew increasingly clear that based on the votes the Bahamians are giving two thumbs down to regulating any form of gambling in the country.

“For question number one the total number of votes, unofficial figures, were 30,767 who voted yes and for the same question those who voted no were 48,012,” he said last week.

“For question number two the yes total is 32,170 and the no votes were 46,961.”
The acting parliamentary commissioner added that the recount is a mandatory requirement set out in the Parliamentary Act.

It did not take very long for the results from last week’s Monday’s gambling vote to be known, coming out just 40 minutes after the polls closed.

February 06, 2013

Jones Bahamas

Caribbean Blog International 

Christie’s failure of leadership is not solely one of chronic incompetence... ...More broadly and egregiously it is an outsized and shameful failure to keep faith with the Bahamian people ...and the demands of social justice... ...No posturing, play-acting or preening by Perry Christie can obscure this sad reality

Flip-flopping Christie flips and flops – again!

Front Porch

By Simon

In the embarrassing climb-down that is his most recent flip-flop on gambling, the prime minister desperately sought to make a virtue out of his incompetence and bungling, and that his government likely lacked the legal authority to proceed with a vote that it probably would have lost: “I am a prime minister who listens.  And in listening to the still evolving public discourse on the forthcoming referendum it has become clear to me that more time is needed before the Bahamian people are called upon to vote.

“I am supported in this view by the leadership of a broad cross-section of the national community with whom I have been consulting over the past few days.”

That Perry Christie believes that voters are gullible enough to believe such balderdash speaks to his contempt for the common sense of those who see through the farce he is attempting to perpetuate in this whole numbers business.  His attempt to describe his latest flip-flop as listening must be an inside joke.

There are reports of private polling to gauge whether the December 3 poll should have been postponed.  One wonders whether this figured into its postponement.

Christie may have been listening, but was it mostly to narrow interests who may funnel campaign contributions to his party, as well as those who gave him stunningly poor advice?

Confusing

If he had indeed listened carefully to a broader cross-section of voices earlier rather than to the drumbeat of his puffed-up hubris and self-serving backers he would not be in this utterly confusing mess of which he is the lead author, though his Cabinet bears collective responsibility for the debacle.

Despite Christie’s involvement in public life for nearly four decades this has been one of the most disastrous performances – at the nexus of policy and politics – by any prime minister in an independent Bahamas.

Christie’s newfound listening posture is not the sign of able leadership that he pretends.  Instead, by failing to adequately consult beforehand, he failed some of the most basic tests of leadership.

His so-called listening reminds one of a toddler who, after burning his finger on the stove for the umpteenth time, stops for the moment, then brags to his mom about how well he’s listening to her advice to stay away from the stove.

There is a back story to this debacle to which Christie alluded in Parliament.  Rattled by Long Island MP Loretta Butler Turner in the House, Christie recited the PLP’s three election wins from the Elizabeth by-election, nearly three years ago, to that of North Abaco, as if to say, how dear you challenge me.

That his party failed to win a majority of the popular vote on May 7 – in part because of his leadership deficits and previous failures as prime minister – has not engendered in him any humility.  Christie’s arrogance is surreal.

It’s the same cloud nine he has been on since May 7, indicative of his narcissistic claim of divine provenance for his prime ministership:  “... But God has spoken.  God has made me the prime minister of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas.”

Often, narcissism’s fraternal twin is megalomania, a “condition characterized by delusional fantasies of ... omnipotence”, and “by an inflated sense of self-esteem and overestimation by persons of their powers.”

Debacle

Christie’s web cafe debacle was conceived in hubris and megalomania, nurtured in sheer incompetence and foisted on the Bahamian people with stunning miscalculation.  His cloud nine has turned to stormy weather.

Fresh off election wins, Christie miscalculated that he would rush through a vote that his party would win giving it political cover to legalize certain enterprises that might prove generous to his party in perpetuity.  Talk of neutrality was always a ruse.  His gambit, thus far, has backfired.

Still, Christie’s hubris was only outmatched by staggering incompetence.  To refresh our memories, let’s recall this government’s comedy of errors:

The PLP’s election charter promised a referendum on a national lottery and gambling.  The government flip-flopped by deciding to hold a referendum solely on web cafes, supposedly on the advice of UK consultants who apparently suggested that a national lottery was not commercially feasible, even though they have admitted to not conducting a more thorough study.

Remember also that Christie said the consultants were preparing a report, which now turns out to be just a few letters.  The breakneck flip-flopping continued: Christie then advised there would be a poll instead of a referendum.

Now, in the latest whip-lashing flip-flop, we are told that the referendum is back on and will include a question on a national lottery, the very lottery that was supposedly commercially non-feasible based on a report which seemingly never existed.  What a tangled web cafe weave.

So staggeringly incompetent has Christie been in this numbers affair, one wonders whether certain colleagues left him to his own devices, so that he might flail, flounder and flip-flop.  The prime minister’s attempt to extricate himself from this entanglement in his most recent House communication on gambling also failed.

Butler-Turner was having none of Christie’s flip-flopping, crying shame on the whole sham, taking Christie’s nerve while taking on a government which seemed dazed as she mocked its breath-taking hypocrisy and muddled thinking.

In a weak defense, Christie boasted of his numbers in the chamber, as if he was rallying his troops in the face of the Long Island MP’s singular offensive.  Curiously, despite the largest Cabinet since internal self-government in 1964, his government’s performance on the gambling issue has been a collective disaster.

Nevertheless, Christie’s leading and vociferous role in this policy and political mess has likely encouraged those within his Cabinet who would rather replace him sooner rather than later.

Bluster

Speaking of crocodile tears, as Christie did last week, an often telling sign that he is under the gun and/or on the losing side of an argument is that he becomes even more voluble and impassioned as he attempts to obfuscate certain facts with performance art, bluster, and often feigned hurt or sincerity, depending on the dramatic persona required.

He did so in the House, referring to those who are too stupid and blind to see certain facts, and those who are being “transparently opportunistic”.  Given Christie’s tin-ear, blinders, wholesale incompetence, collapsed credibility, dissembling and spectacularly opportunistic flip-flopping on this issue, his was not the best choice of language.

While Christie’s performance in the House last week may not be good enough for an Academy Award, it merits a nomination for a Daytime Emmy.  Unfortunately, his performance then and during the course of the current debate will not win him an award for excellence in public policy or good governance.

The very day that Christie was performing his latest flip-flop in the House, Fr. Jimmy Palacious lambasted the government’s web cafe intentions.  He lamented that this government would seek to push through a poll on gambling while women are constitutionally still unequal to men.

This is the crying shame of Perry Christie’s PLP, demonstrably quicker in seeking to secure the greed of private interests rather than the public good of the mass of Bahamians, and the equality of women.

Christie’s failure of leadership is not solely one of chronic incompetence.  More broadly and egregiously it is an outsized and shameful failure to keep faith with the Bahamian people and the demands of social justice.  No posturing, play-acting or preening by Perry Christie can obscure this sad reality.

November 20, 2012

thenassauguardian

frontporchguardian@gmail.com

www.bahamapundit.com>

From web shop operations to the legality of a referendum ...Perry Christie has been staggeringly confusing... ...Given his utter confusion, one can imagine how voters feel... ...A NO vote is the only logical choice amidst the great confusion Christie has wrought

Flip-flopping and dissembling: Christie’s credibility collapses
Front Porch

By Simon



In the debate on gambling we have a prime minister more engaged in zero-sum game-playing biased towards special interests rather than an open, straightforward approach that would benefit the majority of Bahamians.

In the lead-up to a promised referendum – rejiggered to an opinion poll – relative of legalizing web cafes, Perry Christie has appeared dissembling, confusing and incorrigibly incompetent.

We are being treated to 50 or so shades of gray, rather than conclusive answers to clear-cut questions.   Whatever the poll tally, an early loser is Christie’s credibility, having crashed, with poor odds of reviving any time soon.

Channelling the contortion of former U.S.-presidential candidate John Kerry that he was for the second Iraq War before he was against it, Christie said there was a report before saying there is no report from his UK-based consultants.

Children are taught early that a contortion often leads to another, then another, resulting in one becoming so tongue-tied and twisted into knots that one begins to resemble a pretzel of irreconcilable contradictions.

In a story in this journal, Christie performed an acrobatic flip worthy of Cirque du Soleil.  Fasten your seatbelt: It’s going to be a bumpy ride following Christie’s flip-flopping:  “‘What report?  What report?’ he [Christie] responded, when asked if he would release the consultants’ report before the referendum on gambling...‘It was never a specific report.

‘It’s no physical report; there are three or four pages of advice that you get from time to time.  I don’t understand the question of whether there is a report to be released.  There are like five, six, seven different letters to us — no report.’

When asked if he would release the written communication from the consultants, he said, ‘No, why would I want to do that?  For years and years we’ve been receiving advice as to casinos and changing casinos, so what is the relevance, that I’m hiding something on it?’  What curious choice of language.

Magician

Christie might double as a magician with the report which he said existed, now only a few pages of advice.  The story confirmed: “However, Christie previously told The Nassau Guardian that the UK consultants presented a ‘report’ to him, but he said he had to review it before he could reveal their advice.”

Confused?  There’s more.  The story’s subtitle, “Christie not clear on how web shops operate”, was highlighted when he was asked a question about the operation of web shops: “‘I have no idea how they do their operations’, he said.  ‘The details will come in the legislation.  It only becomes relevant if in fact there is a vote for us to go ahead.’”  Further: “He said he wrestled with the decision to exclude a national lottery from the ballot.”

Let’s see if we can unravel this tangled web cafe weave that is being spun into a yarn.  Christie claims that he has no idea about certain web shop operations.  Well, shouldn’t he have made inquires before calling a referendum on the very web cafes of which he claims to have limited knowledge.

It’s the ever-so-handy ignorance defense Christie employs, like his claim that he doesn’t know if various web shop enterprises gave money to his party at the recent general election.  Watch for his ignorance defense on other hot-button issues.

In terms of web cafes, surely a well-informed leader and self-described great democrat like Christie would want to dispel his veil of ignorance on matters which speak to a potential conflict of interest and the need for good governance.  Curiously, in claiming ignorance of these matters he is also claiming to be woefully incompetent.

Indeed, if Christie is so studiously ignorant of matters widely-known among the general populace, and critical for decision-making on web cafe gambling, he clearly lacks the credibility to make informed judgments on this complex issue.

Nonsense

Inexcusably, he is counselling that various matters that should be known in advance will only become relevant after a yes vote.  There it is: Christie thinks that he’s that clever and voters that stupid to buy such nonsense.

Christie offered that he: “ ...wrestled with the decision to exclude a national lottery from the ballot.”  Was it the sort of wrestling one might watch on television in which promoters know the results beforehand, and after heavily betting on the outcome?

Nevertheless, as there is supposedly no report and only a few letters from the consultants, what was Christie wrestling with?  By the way, how much were the consultants paid for the few letters of advice?  And, if there is no detailed report, why should we believe his claim that a national lottery is commercially nonviable?

The Nassau Guardian’s story noted: “Christie said those who are concerned about how web shops would operate in a regulated industry should be satisfied that the government would impose ‘stringent and effective’ laws on the market.”

Suppose a flip-flopping, fast-talking travelling salesman asks for a blank check for a vague-sounding scheme, the details of which he will give you only after you hand him the check?  It would be folly to handover such a check.

Given the jackpot of lemons of foolish talk, inconsistency and reluctance to share certain information, the Christie administration should not be handed a blank check on the question of web cafe gambling.
The Guardian story read: “Last week, the prime minister said the referendum would only ask Bahamians to vote on whether they wish web shops to be legalized...”.  Here’s where knowledge of how web cafes operate is critically important for such a seemingly ill-informed prime minister to understand.

Today’s web cafes are gambling enterprises through which customers may bet on all manner of games from overseas lotteries to games of chance one might find in a casino.

Variance

In being asked whether such cafes should be legalized are we essentially being asked to green-light private lotteries and online casino gambling?  All of which appears at variance with what Christie said in a House communication: “Based on the considered advice of the government’s UK-based, international specialist consultants, it is no longer considered that a national lottery would be commercially viable at this time.”

A national lottery is less viable if competing lotteries are being run by private interests who will pocket the vast majority of the profits.

But a national lottery is commercially viable if the web cafes become national lottery outlets instead of a cartel raking in windfall profits for formerly criminal enterprises.

In a shameful betrayal of the national interest and the common good Perry Gladstone Christie has opted for a private lottery system that will mostly benefit the greed of a few, instead of a national lottery that will overwhelmingly benefit the needs of the many.

Christie also said in his communication: “ ...Neither the extension of casino gambling nor the removal of the prohibition on casino gambling by Bahamian citizens and residents will be the subject of the forthcoming referendum. ... To be completely clear, therefore, the forthcoming referendum will focus only on web shop gaming.”

Sadly, when this prime minister says that he intends “to be completely clear” that may signal that contradictions and convoluted rhetoric will follow.  Unless we are absolutely clear on the gambling to be permitted in web cafes, the legalization of web cafe-related casino gambling may be in the offing.  So Bahamians will be permitted to legally engage in this type of casino gambling, but not in casinos?

Christie’s claim of neutrality in the debate on gambling is a farce wrapped in a series of flip-flopping riddles, chronic contradictions and breathtaking hypocrisy.

Of his rush to have a vote on gambling, Christie said with a straight face that the opposition would have to get used to his supposedly newfound pace of decision-making.  Of course that had to be a joke.

The sad truth is that Christie and his government are chronically incompetent whether they are late-again or rush into a bungling and inept decision.  With Christie, no matter the pace of his decisions, competence has never been his strong suit.

From web shop operations to the legality of a referendum on this issue, Christie has been staggeringly confusing.  Given his utter confusion, one can imagine how voters feel.  A no vote is the only logical choice amidst the great confusion Christie has wrought.

November 13, 2012

The Nassau Guardian



www.bahamapundit.com

frontporchguardian@gmail.com

The Free National Movement (FNM) believes that Prime Minister Perry Christie is moving with uncharacteristic speed to push through a referendum ...followed by legislation to legalize the numbers business

PM Christie’s Rush on to Legalize the Numbers Business

What is the RUSH? Will haste make for more wasted lives?

Prime Minister Christie is moving with uncharacteristic speed to push through a referendum followed by legislation to legalize the numbers business.  The Free National Movement believes this is the wrong thing to do. We agree with others in the religious and civic communities that he needs to slow down and be a lot more thoughtful and deliberate.

The most recent community leader to echo this sentiment is Rev. Dr; Myles Munroe who has highlighted points that others have raised: the process is being rushed; there has been insufficient time for contemplation; it is unfair to ask people to make such a big decision with “very little information”; there is no reported (local) research on the impact gambling has had in Bahamian communities or on the likely long-term impact if the web-shop and similar gambling are legalized. These are all legitimate points that remand careful consideration.

The Prime Minister needs to slow down. There needs to be an opportunity for the Bahamian people to understand and appreciate all of the issues.  If the government truly has no “horse in the race”, then certainly there is no logical need to rush.

With back to school only just behind us, the Christmas holiday on the horizon and the repairs and replacements needed because of the devastation of ”Sandy”, it would be ill advised to ask people who may be at their most vulnerable to seriously consider any decision on gambling at this time.

It is obvious that a thorough and extensive report is needed as to the economic, psychological, cultural and moral impact that this activity has on our country today and potentially the future.

During its tour of Family Island communities impacted by Hurricane Sandy, the FNM was once again reminded of another storm that has been striking Family Island communities for several years; that of the proliferation of gambling houses.

In point of fact, community leaders have expressed alarm. Gambling has become so pervasive and socially damaging that these leaders report that more and more residents seem to lose the passion for work, in favour of staking theirs and their families’ futures on “winning big” in the gambling houses. The impact has been very real and very damaging to the social fabric in Family island communities.

This pattern has become so pervasive that one school principal advised the FNM that primary school children spend significant amounts of their time plotting out which numbers to buy and how to win. The principal describes the impact on young people as an epidemic.

It is imperative that a responsible government take the time to determine the extent to which these anecdotal stories are localized to only one or a few communities or whether this decay is the reality across the entire Bahamas.

Cart before the horse

The growing number of concerns from responsible leaders of the civic and religious communities and average Bahamians again raise the question of whether the Prime Minister’s approach is backwards. It seems clearer than ever, that the right approach is for the government to exhaustively study this matter then, following widespread consultation with all stakeholders, bring and act to parliament accompanied by the proposed referendum question or questions.  The legislative and consultation process will afford everyone an opportunity to study the reports of the Prime Minister’s so-called experts…before a decision is made. No other approach seems fair or reasonable…or responsible for that matter.

Financial priorities

The cost to provide financial aid to communities hit hard by Hurricane Sandy should also cause the government to eliminate the financial costs of a rushed and ill-conceived referendum.

November 1, 2012

fnm2012.org

Caribbean Blog International

The Christie-led government has remained noncommittal concerning oil drilling in The Bahamas

PM still committed to referendum on oil drilling

By Candia Dames
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com

While a referendum on oil drilling is not currently the priority of the Bahamas government, Prime Minister Perry Christie told The Nassau Guardian he remains committed to such a referendum.

But he said “there would have to be serious indications that there is oil and natural gas in commercial quantities”.

“I committed my party to if we are going to have oil drilling in The Bahamas while we are in power, we will do so by seeking the support of the people of The Bahamas, so the answer is yes,” said the prime minister when asked recently by The Nassau Guardian whether the referendum was still planned.

He said,  “One of the dangers for The Bahamas is that concessions are being given to explore in the same area by the Cuban government and it would be a very interesting development as they are in a position to start exploring and digging a well before us.

“If they were to find a well then it makes it almost a compelling case for The Bahamas having to do the same thing.  And so, we’re not going to look a gift horse in the mouth and play crazy with it.

“But at this particular time we have to continue to assess where we are on that subject matter to see whether in fact the company (Bahamas Petroleum Company) is in a position to finance drilling because it’s a huge sum of money involved in that.

“This is not a $50 million or $60 million kind of enterprise.  This is a hugely expensive enterprise, particularly with the environmental safeguards that should be in place.

“And so, at some stage or the other the company will come forth to us to say,  ‘listen, we are ready to do the following things and this is the evidence we have that you have fossil fuels there’ and we’ll see.”

Bahamas Petroleum Company (BPC) has committed to spudding its exploratory well in Bahamian waters by April 2013, although recent reports from the company indicate this drill date could be pushed back later in the year.

BPC is looking to bring on an operational and equity partner for the drill, The Nassau Guardian previously reported.

The Christie-led government has remained noncommittal concerning oil drilling in The Bahamas.

“We do believe that the Bahamian people ought to be consulted,” said Kenred Dorsett, the minister of the environment, previously. “Whether it goes the extent of a referendum, that will have to be determined based on the costs. That is a matter for the Cabinet to decide.”

Prior to the election in April, the previous government suspended BPC’s oil drilling licenses. There has been no formal announcement from the new government as to whether these licenses have been renewed.

The Christie administration has also committed to a referendum on gambling, which the prime minister has said will be called by the end of this year; and a constitutional referendum on citizenship matters, which the government intends to call before the end of the term.

Aug 13, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

There is even a way that Perry Christie can confront the claims of his weakness when compared to Hubert Ingraham... and that is by challenging Ingraham to a debate and beating him

Christie’s keys to success, Part 2

Dr Ian G. Strachan

Last week we looked at the challenge facing Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Leader Perry Christie in 2012, a challenge he can certainly meet, if he plays his cards right.  Let’s go a bit deeper.

First, let’s look at the people who will join him on the PLP ticket. Christie knows he will do well to enlist as many young, new faces as possible. His challenge is to keep the old guard happy while he does it. This has proven to be a challenge.

The infamous May 5, 2011 letter, penned by George Smith, Philip Galanis and Raynard Rigby, attests to this.  I suppose some would say that before Christie can ask others to step aside he should volunteer to do so himself.  Well, we all know that's not happening.

Given that some of the sitting MPs in the PLP are a liability in terms of swing voters, it may seem ironic but I think Christie should try to move the discussion away from the head to head comparisons with Ingraham and focus on the PLP’s team instead.

If he can’t dump the undesirables, his best bet is to hide them, the way Ingraham hid Symonette during the 2007 campaign.  The FNM knows he can win his seat but they also know he hurts you on the national campaign trail.

The PLP should also not be afraid to let new team members do a lot of the talking during this campaign, to avoid the Christie-fatigue voters are feeling.

The PLP still has BJ Nottage, Glenys Hanna-Martin, Alfred Sears, Fred Mitchell, Ryan Pinder, Michael Halkitis, James Smith, Philip Galanis, Raynard Rigby, Danny Johnson, Jerome Fitzgerald, Damian Gomez, Andre Rollins, Renward Wells, Romauld Ferreira, and many other young professionals who are articulate and smart.

The PLP attracts skilled communicators, who can appeal to the working and middle class and who have the potential to become inspirational leaders.  There are many whose names are not known to the general public whom Christie should quickly call off the bench.

The party practically owns the working class constituencies, so it can flood the campaign with empathetic tales of woe.  The sympathetic approach, so familiar to the PLP, which always promises “help and hope,” should go over well in a country low on confidence and uncertain (scared even) about its future.

Christie should also use his reputation as someone who consults to his advantage.  He may listen, where Ingraham may not.  He may draw on the talents of others and collaborate, not dictate. This kind of message will make sense to those swing voters who, for the life of them, can’t understand Ingraham’s approaches to our problems. It worked in 2002; maybe it can work in 2012.

There is even a way that Christie can confront the claims of his weakness when compared to Ingraham and that is by challenging Ingraham to a debate and beating him.

If Ingraham refuses, Christie still wins. The nation wants to see these men debate crime, the economy, education, health care, foreign direct investment, local investment, BTC, Bahamasair, immigration and land reform. These two men, who have been the giants of our politics for the last 25 years, owe us no less.  Some people close to Christie say he is scared of taking Ingraham on in a debate.  Perhaps he can win without taking the risk.

The PLPs must paint a picture of what might have been if they had the reins during this recession and what will be when they take over again.  Their message will have to make more sense and be more concrete than perhaps it ever has been.  Swing voters don’t want pie in the sky promises (like you will double the education budget).  What are you going to do about teacher quality?  About parental neglect?  About the weak Math scores?

Ingraham has many blind spots.  I have said many times that the FNM seemed out of touch with what the people felt were the real priorities in the country.  Christie must rip apart the FNM’s action plan of the last four years, showing all the missed opportunities.  (But they must be careful since many of the FNM’s blind spots have been theirs as well).

Ingraham’s government has ignored many progressive alternatives to our national development challenges.  The PLP needs to prove it knows how to be progressive again.

The real X factor in all this, is of course the DNA. This group will steal votes from both parties (eroding their bases) and make many races almost impossible to predict, particularly in southern New Providence. One school of thought is that the DNA will steal FNM votes since DNA Leader Branville McCartney is a disgruntled FNM.  Another is that swing voters, unhappy with Ingraham, but who can’t stomach Christie, will go green.

In the end, the PLP has to guarantee its base support and work hard to lure some of the swing vote its way.

Christie and his team can do this most effectively by leaning heavily on the NDP’s “Bahamians first” messaging, which struck a chord with the nation. They must also give their new faces heavy play at the rallies.

In the end, if the 68-year-old Christie loses this election he has no one to blame but himself.  Almost all the cards are in his hands. If he fails, it would prove two things: He was indeed ineffectual and out of touch and the PLP has learned absolutely nothing since 1997, when another old man who should have been forced to step down, drove them right into the ground.

Sep 12, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

The difference between Perry Christie and Hubert Ingraham: Christie talks... and Ingraham acts

tribune242 editorial


WHILE Prime Minister Ingraham was still out in a helicopter last night -- landing in Nassau at 9.45pm-- after touring various settlements in Abaco, Opposition leader Perry Christie was in Nassau talking -- rather complaining about government's disaster strategy.

At a press conference yesterday PLP officials directed our attention to government's "mistakes" and "failures" in response to Hurricane Irene. We always take these directions as an invitation to go a step further. For us it is a temptation to open the PLP files on their administration's handling of the back-to-back Hurricanes Jeanne and Frances in 2004, and the NEMA disaster funds for which -- if memory serves -- Bahamians are yet to be given an accounting for that period. Sir Jack Hayward certainly made enough noise over his million dollar donation, which was not used for the hurricane repairs for which he intended them.

On Saturday a 72-year-old lady from Eight Mile Rock said that she realised that many of our islands had been badly damaged by Hurricane Irene. "But thank God that the FNM are in power this time," she added. She said she would never want anyone to experience what they had to experience under the PLP after the 2004 hurricanes. She knew the FNM would be fair. This speaks volumes, and our files of that period will support her words.

What went on today just illustrates the difference between the two leaders - Ingraham and Christie - and their administrations. One talks... the other acts. And when election day comes, Bahamians will have to decide which man they would prefer to administer their affairs - the one landing back in Nassau last night in a helicopter amidst rolling thunder after visiting his constituents, or the one in the safety of the capital complaining to the press.

Mr Christie thought that Prime Minister Ingraham's post hurricane assessment was insensitive to victims whose livelihood had been severely affected.

"When the leader of the country enters into a debate on a matter of a distaste and the impact of it, he has to exercise greater care than (Mr Ingraham) exercised in speaking."

We presume that Mr Christie was referring to Mr Ingraham being disturbed that a newspaper chose the word "devastated" to describe the affect of Irene on these islands. Ever a positive man of action, the word "devastated" conveyed to Mr Ingraham that our islands were down and out for the count. This is a position that he accepts in nothing -- damaged, yes, but down and out, no.

He saw the people's suffering. He felt it deeply. He knew many had lost everything, but he was on a tireless mission to see that they were helped to their feet as quickly as possible. He, like everyone else, was lamenting the destruction, he was not minimising or "making light" of something that was incredibly serious. But, he knew that sitting down crying over a disaster would not get anyone anywhere quickly -- and so he moved on from island to island, discovering the damage for himself and deciding how quickly it could be repaired.

He is leaving the walking and talking and touching and looking into people's eyes to see their hurt and pain -- as expressed at the press conference by MICAL MP Alfred Grey -- to Mr Grey and Mr Christie. While they are "pressing flesh", he will be getting the material to put a roof of people's heads.

"Brave" Davis, Cat Island MP, who hurried to his district right after the hurricane, suggested that Mr Ingraham consider waiving the duty on appliances for affected persons. While Mr Davis was suggesting, Mr Ingraham was doing. He had already announced that government will allow Cat Island's eligible residents to import building and electrical materials and agricultural supplies duty free.

Before leaving for Abaco yesterday to inspect the damage there, Mr Ingraham said: "Cat Island seems to be the most affected so they will have the longest period of duty exemption." He added that he thought a case could be made for Acklins and Mayaguana. However, he thought that Acklins and Cat Island were "at the top of the pile."

While Mr Davis was talking, HMBS Nassau was in Smith's Bay, Cat Island, delivering a team of Defence Force officers to distribute food, water and tarpaulin and other items to Cat Island residents who lost homes and possessions.

The officers will also help clean up the island. Mr Ingraham's government is also arranging to set up a reverse osmosis plant and generators in Cat Island.

This is hardly the behaviour of a man who fails to understand a people's tremendous loss and personal tragedy. We are confident that these stricken Bahamians would prefer what Mr Ingraham and his government are trying to do for them.

If Mr Gray thinks that what the Ingraham government is doing is "fast and inadequate," we leave it to Mr Gray to "walk and talk and touch and look in people's eyes and see the hurt and pain." People will quickly realise that these walks, talks, touching and eye contact will not put bread on their tables or a roof over their heads.

So, Bahamians, take your pick.

August 30, 2011

tribune242 editorial

caribbean Blog International