The Coalition of Independents - COI on the Resignation of Democratic National Alliance - DNA Party Leader, Arinthia Komolafe

10th December, 2021

Press Statement of the Leader of the Coalition of Independents on the resignation of the leader of the DNA.

The Coalition of Independents has been made aware of the immediate resignation of DNA leader Arinthia Komolafe. We would like to extend best wishes to Mrs. Komolafe on her future endeavors. Mrs Komolafe can be proud of the fact that she took on a great mantle as the second female leader of a political party in the Bahamas. The COI believes that more women should step forward into the political arena to assist in guiding our people into the New Bahamas.

 

Mrs. Komolafe has stated that she is not leaving front line politics while her resignation speech implies that she is departing from the DNA because she feels that third party politics is too challenging. This could mean that she may choose to align with one of the parties that she has been speaking out against for the previous two elections. While this would be disappointing, we know that as a talented Bahamian she would be an asset to any organization she is a part of.

The Coalition of Independents will continue to stand firm as the only political alternative with a vision to empower all Bahamians. We are unwavering in our view that the natural resources of this nation belongs to the Bahamian people and that every Bahamian should benefit from them. We are resolute in our belief that one day Bahamians will be put first in our nation. 

Lincoln Bain

Leader

Coalition of Independents

-End

Source/Comment

Many younger voters are hungry for change and may take a chance on Branville McCartney and his Democratic National Alliance (DNA).... ...Many older voters don’t have the confidence in the party

A vision for The Bahamas

By Erica Wells
Guardian Managing Editor
erica@nasguard.com

In the opening pages of the Democratic National Alliance’s (DNA) document outlining its plans for The Bahamas, the party’s leader, Branville McCartney, promises that his DNA will recast the “national vision” for the country.

This vision, he said, is the vision that was first cast in 1967 and 1973.  It was a vision that “included all Bahamians”.

According to McCartney, “44 years after majority rule and 38 years after independence, our nation has lost sight of this vision to create a Bahamian society based on equality of opportunity and a collective effort to ensure that our people get the best that the country and the world has to offer.  The vision has been derailed and we have been led off course.”

The DNA, said McCartney, is able to recast that vision because it is steeped in an understanding of the past and is focused on the opportunities of the future.  The document meant to convince voters of this – Vision 2012 and Beyond – was the result of collaboration between the DNA and the Bahamian public “at large”, said McCartney.

“It reflects what you care about deeply: the economy and diversification of the economy, crime, education, youth development and other issues which are plaguing the country,” he said.  “It also reflects the notion that these issues, when addressed with thoughtful ingenuity and skill, have the potential to revolutionize the country.”

Like all written plans, the proof is in the execution of what is outlined.  And whether the DNA will get the chance to execute those plans after the May 7 general election remains to be seen.

While the DNA was the first to release its plan for the country and promise to voters, (the Free National Movement released its plan shortly after and the Progressive Liberal Party is expected to release its document this week) voters have little time to digest the DNA’s or the other parties’ agendas before the election.

The vision

The DNA’s vision touches on key areas of national importance: crime, healthcare, jobs and the economy, education, immigration, youth, sports and culture, Grand Bahama, Family Island development, good governance, tourism, labor and industrial relations, and energy and the environment.

The promises are not expanded upon and there is no detail provided on how the plan will meet its objectives, which has been typical of these types of political publications.

Some political observers give McCartney’s DNA credit for having some of the best ideas for national development of the three major parties.  Others dismiss some of the ideas as unrealistic and in some cases unmanageable.

For example, under the heading of crime, the DNA’s idea to develop a comprehensive and research proven system to rehabilitate offenders, inclusive of academic programs and work readiness and skills building programs, is a commendable one.

But the DNA also promises to enforce capital punishment and ensure that bail is not granted for accused murderers.  Given the Privy Council’s rulings that directly impact the capacity for any government to carry out capital punishment, and the right to a fair and speedy trial afforded to all Bahamians under the constitution, it will be extremely difficult for a DNA or any other government to enforce and ensure such actions.

Other promises hinge greatly on available finances, at a time when it’s difficult for many to see where the money will come from.  The deficit is at $4.2 billion and the economy is still struggling to regain ground from a worldwide recession.

Take for example, the promise to reduce class sizes by “building modern school facilities and enhancing existing school facilities”; and to increase infrastructure funding for the redevelopment and expansion of road networks, healthcare facilities and airports in the Family Islands.

The party also promises to balance the budget within five years.

While the DNA is ambitious in its plans for the country and it should be commended for its aspirations, it must be careful not to play to the gallery and risk losing the trust of more sober minds and eventually the public at large.

Perhaps the most progressive portion of the DNA’s Vision is under the heading of Good Governance, where the party promises to:

• Amend the constitution to limit the powers of the prime minister.

• Enact legislation to limit the length of service of the prime minister to two terms.

• Enact legislation to cause the recall of members of Parliament if a majority of their constituents are dissatisfied with their performance.

• Establish fixed constituencies, which can only be changed according to international criteria.

• Establish the Office of the Ombudsman to serve as the watchdog of the government for the people.

The DNA has also promised to create a much needed code of conduct for public officials.

Among its other major promises are a focus on economic diversification, to establish a basic healthcare plan, to hold a referendum on whether children born in The Bahamas to illegal immigrants should have the right to apply for citizenship, and to regularize generation property.

A young party

The DNA is a young party.  On Election Day, it will be five days short of its one-year anniversary.  It has attempted to brand itself as a party that is making a bold statement.  A party made up of a new breed of young Bahamian politicians, entrepreneurs, professionals and blue-collar workers.

Its leader has relatively little experience in frontline politics.  Most Bahamians first heard of him in 2007 when he ran under the Free National Movement’s banner for Bamboo Town.  Less than three years later he would resign from Hubert Ingraham’s Cabinet, where he sat as a junior minister.

His decision to leave the party left many baffled; however, others gave him credit for “standing up” to Ingraham.

McCartney has been heavily criticized on some of his positions taken on immigration, and more recently the marital rape law.  His statement that a Marital Rape Bill would not be passed under his administration was seen as a major misstep in his campaign, and it could have put off potential female voters.  The party was forced into damage control mode at a time when its efforts should have been focused on the election campaign.

The party will field a candidate in every one of the 38 constituencies, and while many political observers seriously doubt the party leader’s prediction that the DNA will win the May 7 general election, the party does have some support.

A Public Domain/Nassau Guardian poll conducted in March indicated that the DNA had a total support base of 21.7 percent.  According to the poll, the FNM and PLP were in a virtual dead heat.  The FNM with 34.2 percent and the PLP with 30.3 percent.

The 2007 general election results show just how close the race this time around could be.  Although the FNM captured 23 of the 41 seats, with 49.86 percent it did not capture the popular vote.  The PLP captured 18 seats and 47.02 percent of the vote.  The number of votes between the PLP and FNM was just 3,905.

This sets up a potentially interesting scenario if the DNA manages to win a few seats in the general election, and manages to upset the balance of power on Election Day.

What is attractive about the DNA is the simple fact that it is an alternative to what have been mainstays in Bahamian politics for so long — Hubert Ingraham and PLP Leader Perry Christie.  Its weakness mainly centers on the lack of experience of its leader and the party’s candidates.

Many younger voters are hungry for change and may take a chance on McCartney and his DNA.  Many older voters don’t have the confidence in the party.

But whatever the result on May 7, McCartney and his DNA have shown that a third party can get support.  The question is, can it get enough support?

Apr 23, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

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

The DNA leader’s mistake

thenassauguardian editorial

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jan 27, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

Wallace Rolle, the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party ...and the change of more of the same

By Dennis Dames:



I have today listened to Mr. Wallace Rolle, the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) candidate for South Beach on Issues of the day. The gentleman appears to be a Utopian of the first order. He gives the impression that he and his party have all the solutions to our ills; like with a DNA victory - all lights will be turned on, unemployment will be eradicated, no one would lose their house, and the hurting that we the people are experiencing just now will be no more.

Mr. Rolle stopped short of promising that the tears from every Bahamian eye will be eliminated under a Democratic National Alliance administration.

He says that we need to diversify our economy. What does this mean? Agriculture and fisheries are already on the move, the Bahamian craft industry has received a major boost with the new straw market policy, and opportunities galore exist for young and the not so young entrepreneurs.

We need to legitimize the numbers business to enhance the nation’s revenue base. We need to look at the LNG question with a view of making a final decision; it looks like a new and potent income stream that could propel our country’s ambition to bring every brother and sister in the fold of economic prosperity. Our problem today is that we are not collecting enough income to pay our national bills; so our hands are tied when it comes to new initiatives right now.

Mr. Rolle spoke of the unemployment concerns of his young constituents, but his status quo and politically correct position is that they will fill every vacancy with a Bahamian who is qualified to perform the job. How will that position solve our unemployment challenges?

If a Democratic National Alliance government borrows funds from a foreign bank for capital works, and the bank insists that XYZ Company from Brazil has to be the general contractor with its hundreds of employees; what will they do? If every international bank relates the similar requirements, where would that leave the country? We would be drowning in our own inanity.

If an international business comes to The Bahamas with tens of millions of dollars in investments and they want to bring in their foreign CEO and comptroller, what will a DNA government do if they feel that Bahamians could fill those positions? Here is where a Bahamian first policy becomes dangerous and counter-productive to national economic development.

We need to personally and collectively take control of our destiny. If we are profoundly divided as a people, then there is nothing a new politician or representative could do for us. Lingering and deep-rooted disunity are holding back our progress as a people, and we must find our respective love button and come together for the common good.

A monumental policy was instituted in our straw market recently, where all goods must be Bahamian made. This decision alone could indirectly employ thousands of our people as the craft market is a forty million dollars a year plus industry. Every young talented Bahamian could take advantage of the opportunity by creating one great Bahamian souvenir item to sell to straw vendors; but opposition politicians would have none of it. As far as they are concerned, the governing Free National Movement (FNM) is simply good for nothing; and they insist on being their constituents employment agents. Yes, even the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) wants to control the people of whom they seek to represent.

It’s called the change of more of the same.

caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) political con game on the Bahamian electorate

By Dennis Dames



I have received a number of comments on my initial piece in relations to the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) election strategy - dated November 26, 2011, from a number of supporters of the party in question. The gist of their reactions was that if the DNA wins a few seats, they feel that they would have enough turncoats in the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), and Free National Movement (FNM) to form a Democratic National Alliance (DNA) government in The Bahamas.

Well what is this!?

How could a minor political party expect elected members of two major organizations to join them in mass to form an administration in The Bahamas? The DNA is obviously living a political fantasy in a castle in the sky; and so called intelligent Bahamians have bought in to the Democratic National Alliance con game on the nation.

They don’t expect to win outright, they don’t expect to pull any deals with the major parties to form a government - if the opportunity presents, and they are blindly confident of PLP and FNM elected traitors coming over to their side to form the next Bahamas government – if push comes to shove.

It is safe to assume that the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is banking on political chaos after the results are confirmed following the 2012 general election. In this way, the spotlight and pressure could be on the respective leaders of the PLP and FNM; Messrs Christie and Ingraham. The Progressive liberal Party, and Free National Movement supporters could turned against their skippers in an atmosphere of political confusion and turmoil; and the Democratic National Alliance would relish irrationally in the uncertainty.

There must be a winner when the smoke clears though, even if it means a re-run of the election.
Here is where we the Bahamian people need to seriously consider who we are going to vote for, and our reasons for doing so. Are we going to vote for a DNA political stalemate and service Branville McCartney and Co’s ego or what?

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is not ready to govern on day one, because they expect to fall well short of the new 20 (twenty) member majority needed for a decisive victory. They would tell anyone who would listen, that they do not expect to win the 2012 election. They are relying on FNM and PLP double agents to pull them through.

It’s a long shot, and a very unrepresentative diversion being played on the Bahamian electorate by the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) – in my humble opinion.

Caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance's (DNA) 2012 general election strategy

By Dennis Dames



As I travel throughout New Providence communities and listen to the various perspectives on the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), one view dominates the people’s opinions. That is that the DNA will win some seats, but it will be well short of a decisive election victory for them; but they could muster enough parliamentary representation to determine the ultimate general election winner.

Well, if the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) finds itself in the position of influencing the next government of The Bahamas through a coalition arrangement, how could it be possible for them to form an administration with the established Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) or free National Movement (FNM) when they consider both political organizations to be out of touch with the vision of a 21 century Bahamas and Bahamian people?

Herein lays the madness of the Democratic Alliance; as the general public – including many DNA supporters believe that the party could only play a spoiler’s role in the 2012 general election. The DNA game looks like a political con on the Bahamian people, because an outright victory for them appears remotely impossible, and it’s this writer’s view that they are not open to a partnership with any of the two major parties – if circumstances present them self.

When we look at New Providence where more than half of the political constituencies are concentrated and boundary changes and lines are becoming clear to all, one must ask oneself: which districts are winnable for the DNA? Eastern, western, northern, southern and central Nassau will be very unkind to the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) – in my view. The best that they could do is influence which PLP or FNM standard bearers will be victorious.

This reminds me of the 1977 general election where an intensely splintered opposition provided the ideal chemistry for the ruling party’s victory. This is something that Branville McCartney - the DNA leader should not be proud about in the end.

It will defeat the purpose of real political change in The Bahamas, and the Moral of the story would be: unite for victory, and divide and get beat.

The DNA is presently engaging in an all-out air political assault where they are busy sending e-mail updates on their activities to persons on their list, and using online platforms like Facebook and Twitter to connect with potential voters. They have yet to begin a well planned and organized ground blitz in the various constituencies. Apparently, they do not see the wisdom of getting a head-start in the field, or they simply don’t care.

One young voter remarked recently that he hasn’t seen anybody yet, despite the reality that a general election is just around the corner. I have been hearing a lot of similar sentiments lately. This is bad news for the DNA; they have not effectively capitalized on the momentum that followed their launch earlier this year, in my opinion. The ground is where they should be by now, instead of the political group orgies and partying among their converts. Stop making fellow DNAs feel good with street rallies, and Party Hardy; and hit the road Jack!

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) has not convinced the Bahamian electorate to get on board their ship in prizewinning numbers to date, and with a general election on the horizon, they seem to be paralyzed about taking their campaign to the level of useful political charm and viability – in my humble view.

Caribbean Blog International

There seem to be more questions than answers regarding the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party... questions that will certainly be answered on General Election Day

The Democratic National Alliance

By Philip C. Galanis

The mission of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is to ensure that the needs and aspirations of Bahamian people – to be owners with the government in the political, cultural, and economic development of the nation – are met.

DNA mission statement

Since its launch in May, 2011 the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), the newest political party on the Bahamian landscape, has gained considerable traction with the Bahamian public, especially those who are clamoring for something different in our body politic.  The pervasive pronouncement is that Bahamians are tired of the behemoth Free National Movement (FNM) and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), or at least of the leaders of those two goliath political machines.  So far, the DNA has named 26 candidates to contest next year's general election and promises to field a full slate of candidates, which is unprecedented for such a new political party.  Therefore this week we would like to Consider This... Does the DNA have staying power?  Can it form the next government and what kind of governance could we expect from this fledging political party?

Historically, third parties have not fared well in Bahamian politics.  The last endeavor of an organized third party, the Coalition for Democratic Reform (CDR), met the fateful disaster of not having any of its candidates poll sufficient votes to enjoy a refund of their deposits.  Therefore, what makes the upcoming contest any different?  Have Bahamian voters sufficiently matured to embrace a third alternative?

Some political pundits and pollsters have suggested that Branville McCartney, the DNA's self-appointed leader, is the most popular politician in Bahamian politics today and that his magnetic mass appeal stems from his courage in taking on his former political mentor, the Rt. Hon. Hubert Ingraham, much as the latter took on his political mentor, the Rt. Hon. Sir Lynden Pindling in 1992.  The only thing that Bahamians love more than a winner is a brash, brazen leader who is prepared to buck the established order.  Will McCartney and his DNA "green team" have what is required to translate those ingredients into a winning team?  And if the DNA cannot win an outright plurality, will they be spoilers, winning enough seats to form a coalition government?

Why now?

Many Bahamians have repeatedly asserted that while Ingraham and Christie are tried and tested, there is a perception that they are tired, with few new ideas, have exceeded their relevance on the political stage and that now is the time for them to exit.  Furthermore, both of those leaders are now in their sixties, and many developed and developing democracies are trending toward leaders in their forties and fifties, including the recent change in Jamaica.

That the DNA has gained any traction at all seems to support the proposition that Bahamians are now ready for a tectonic shift in the established order.  Their appeal could be as much grounded in their freshness and youth as in a yearning for a generational shift, precipitated by our changing demographics.  The DNA seems to be gaining considerable appeal among young voters who increasingly constitute a very large segment of the voting populace.   Furthermore, the DNA has positioned itself as a party of the middle class, compared to the PLP and the FNM who are seen to represent grassroots and elitist voters, respectively.

The DNA's challenges

The most pronounced challenge which the DNA has to overcome is its inexperience.  With the exception of its leader, none of the DNA candidates have any experience in governance.  Those who say that Lynden Pindling and his team did not have any experience in government when he first became premier in 1967 are missing a very essential point.  While it is true that Pindling and his team were inexperienced in actual governance, they were certainly experienced in parliamentary democracy, with many years experience in Parliament before attaining majority rule.  This is an extremely important difference and one that should not escape or be easily dismissed by the green team.

The DNA's first test will be a demonstrable ability to construct a national election machine to stage a national campaign.  If it can do that, the most essential question which McCartney has to address is whether the Bahamian people are prepared to hand over the government to such an inexperienced group of newcomers.   And if the DNA were to win, it will take a very long time for a DNA government to learn the system of governance along with the workings of the deeply entrenched and all-powerful public service, as well as to obtain a basic understanding of how to run a country.  The DNA's first test as government will be the preparation and defense of a national budget, no mean feat for even a seasoned political organization.   And, no matter how brilliant the ideas and vision of the DNA, in our present precarious circumstances, we must ask if our country can afford the time it will take these political newcomers to learn the ins and outs of how to run the country.

Another important consideration is that most of the DNA's announced candidates are unknown on the national scene.  What does the electorate really know about its candidates and their backgrounds?  What do they stand for and have they been successful in their various professional or occupational endeavors?

In addition, the DNA has not yet clearly articulated its platform.  What differentiates the DNA from the other mainstream parties?  We are still not certain what the party stands for and how it will implement its agenda.  What skills do they have in drafting the legislation that it will have to table in Parliament in order to implement its programs and policies?    Who will comprise the cabinet and what experience will such persons bring to their various portfolios?  And is the DNA prepared to make the many appointments to boards, commissions and the foreign service?  These are the essential decisions that will have to be taken almost immediately if the DNA is transformed from a political party to a government.   These are the issues that members of the electorate will have to consider when casting their ballots on Election Day.

Conclusion

We believe that the next general election will be keenly contested, fiercely fought and extremely exciting.  As we saw in the Elizabeth by-election, many races will be cliffhangers and every single vote will be important.

One thing is certain.  There seem to be more questions than answers regarding the DNA, questions that will certainly be answered on Election Day.

Philip C. Galanis is the managing partner of HLB Galanis & Co., Chartered Accountants, Forensic & Litigation Support Services. He served 15 years in Parliament.  Please send your comments to: pgalanis@gmail.com

Nov 07, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Branville McCartney and the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) are really creations of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Free National Movement (FNM) ...If the PLP and FNM had offerings that wowed the people, McCartney would never have created his party ...But because he senses a national dissatisfaction, he pushes forward

So much passion about Branville McCartney

thenassauguardian editorial

It is always interesting reading your letters and commentary – especially the pieces written on politics.  Lately much has been sent in about Branville McCartney, the Member of Parliament for Bamboo Town and leader of the Democratic National Alliance.  Some of it has been published; some will be published.

The common theme from the well-written pieces, to the average pieces is that there is great passion about McCartney.  Some argue aggressively that he is ‘the One’ who will lead The Bahamas to prosperity; some argue that he is an arrogant upstart, who is not prepared to be prime minister.

Two of our columnists of late have dedicated significant space to McCartney.  Dr. Ian Strachan, an English professor and political commentator, dissected McCartney and the DNA in recent pieces in our National Review section.  Simon, the writer of the Tuesday column Front Porch, who defends Hubert Ingraham and all things FNM all the time, waged war against the green party in successive columns in recent months.

Beyond those who send thoughts, or publish in the paper, there is obvious interest in the community about this politician.  People always ask our reporters and editors, “What do you think about Bran?  You think he has a chance?”

The attack on McCartney in the House of Assembly last week by South Abaco MP (FNM) Edison Key helped lift McCartney’s profile as much as it raised questions about his conduct as a minister in Ingraham’s Cabinet.  Key alleged that McCartney petitioned him for work for his law firm while he was a minister.  McCartney rejected the allegation.

What was most interesting is that McCartney was quite aggressive as he argued his innocence in the House.  A longtime political observer, who was there during the incident, said McCartney said at one point, “Old man, sit down.”

Whether he said this or not, is beside the point. That comment, perfectly, encapsulates the fascination with McCartney.

Bahamians want change to a political order that no longer inspires them.  Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and Opposition Leader Perry Christie are historic figures.  Few men going forward will ever hold elected seats in Parliament for more than 30 years and be prime minister.  Both men have done so.

The problem is that at the latter part of your career, when you have served for so long, people have already seen the best of you.  And in times of crisis or malaise, those same people wonder if someone else, someone younger, someone with new and different ideas, might not be better suited to take a try at fixing common problems.

We are not arguing that McCartney is ‘the One’.  He has much to prove in the months to come.  It would be a major achievement if his party wins a few seats.

But, we must acknowledge that many Bahamians have not been satisfied with the direction the country has been heading in for many years, spanning PLP and FNM administrations.

McCartney and the DNA are really creations of the PLP and FNM.  If the PLP and FNM had offerings that wowed the people, McCartney would never have created his party.  But because he senses a national dissatisfaction, he pushes forward.

What he should not be attacked for is offering for higher public service.  More young Bahamians, educated and trained, need to step forward to help their country.  The tone of some of McCartney’s critics is excessive.  To sum it up, they appear angry that he would dare challenge the established order.

We live in a democracy – the more choice for the electorate the better.  Competition should help refine the two older parties.  The green party is no threat to our country.  Whether it survives or not after the general election, it is just another part of our political evolution.

Oct 26, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

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

DNA not ready to govern

By Kevin Evans

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

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

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

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

McCartney’s ambition

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

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

Is the public losing affection for McCartney?

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

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

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

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

DNA government would harm country

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

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

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

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

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

Oct 21, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

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

Gone Green? Part 2

By Ian G. Strachan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oct 17, 2011

Gone Green? - Part 1

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

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

McCartney’s Vanity Fair

Front Porch

By Simon

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

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

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

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

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

 

Singular

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Judgement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Privilege

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Obsession

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

frontporchguardian@gmail.com

www.bahamapundit.com

Oct 18, 2011

thenassauguardian

Branville McCartney - Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader says Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham is a bully, and Progressive Liberal Party leader Perry Christie a wimp

McCartney lashes out at Christie, Ingraham

By Candia Dames
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com

Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham’s recent comments on Bamboo Town and Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader Branville McCartney last week might have been a sure sign that election season is heating up.

At a recent reception at Workers House for DNA candidate Alfred Poitier — the DNA’s candidate for Kennedy — McCartney called Ingraham a bully and Progressive Liberal Party leader Perry Christie a wimp.

“I don’t want my children to watch my prime minister any more,” McCartney told DNA supporters.

“Can you imagine?  Shame on you, prime minister.  The game is over.”

Speaking in the House of Assembly last week, Ingraham said McCartney was not in his or Christie’s league and that if the Free National Movement does not win Bamboo Town then the Progressive Liberal Party would.

Ingraham also said that when he was a young MP, he was arrogant and had hard mouth, but was able to back up everything he told then Prime Minister Sir Lynden Pindling about taking on the Progressive Liberal Party.

At his political meeting, McCartney said, “At the end of the day he talks about backing up.  He called Mr. Pindling out and said this and said that.  But I don’t care what he said to Mr. Pindling 20 odd years ago.

“...He could not back up the crime problem, reduce the crime problem, he could not back up the illegal immigration problem and he could not back up what we have with this economy today.

“He has no answers.  He is void of answer.  He could not back up at the end of the day our broken education system.  He could not back up the issues.  He could back up his mouth.

“All he is is a big bully and Mr. Perry Christie sat back and took it like a little wimp.”

McCartney has previously suggested that he might not run in Bamboo Town, a seat he won as an FNM candidate in 2007.

He said last week that the good thing about being leader of the DNA is he could decide which constituency he runs in.

The PLP did not contest the Bamboo Town seat in 2002 or 2007, but will be running Renward Wells in that constituency in the next general election.  Wells is a former executive of the National Development Party.

Former Bahamas Democratic Movement leader Cassius Stuart is expected to be the FNM’s candidate for Bamboo Town.

Ingraham has suggested that McCartney would be competing in his league with those two candidates as his competitors.

The prime minister also referred to Bamboo Town as “my things” and said McCartney was not going anywhere with it.

Oct 17, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

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

Gone Green?

By Ian G. Strachan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More on Bran and the DNA, next week.

Oct 10, 2011

Gone Green? - Part 2

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) good approach to politics

A good approach to politics

thenassauguardian editorial

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA), or the green party as it is called by some, is hosting yet another town hall meeting Wednesday.  This one will be on the topic of education.  The party has previously held town hall meetings on crime and immigration.

The new party should keep it up.  Town hall meetings are a bit more intellectually involved than Bahamian political rallies.  At these meetings there is a topic, the audience is more sober and seated and there is a speaker.  The audience then gets to ask questions – not all of which are friendly.

The give and take of the town hall meeting means that politicians have to be prepared for challenges. Rally goers are different as compared to those who would prefer to go to a town hall meeting.

Rallies are glorified parties in The Bahamas these days.  A good part of the audience is intoxicated and waiting to be entertained by speakers who provide much noise and little substance.  And as those rally speakers deliver their empty lines, loud music is usually played.  This makes it clear to those assembled that the main purpose of the event is not to listen, but to have a good time.

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and the Free National Movement (FNM) love rallies.  The new party would do well to continue to appeal to the mind.  The Bahamas has serious problems.

Our largest private sector employer, Atlantis, is in debt restructuring negotiations in order to avoid default and foreclosure; there will be a fourth homicide record in five years this year; our economy has been weak and unemployment high since the financial crisis of 2008; the roadwork on New Providence is causing serious movement problems; and several islands are recovering from being directly hit by Hurricane Irene.

In this context, we do not need ‘rally talk’.  We do not need to hear about who did what to his sweetheart or who is weak and who is strong.  We need policy, dialogue and solutions.

At this stage in the history of The Bahamas, we need leaders who are sober and like to think.  We do not need dancers or entertainers who are masters at using rally stages to waste the time of the people.

Bahamians should always engage with politicians when they seek to analyze and discuss issues for the purpose of coming up with good policies.  We should also ignore the frivolous and the silly.  People change dysfunctional culture.

We are nearing the peak of election season in serious times and as a people we must mature politically.  By doing so, we will force the parties to organize more sensible fora such as town hall meetings and debates and fewer drunken parties at the forts and public parks.

Sep 12, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

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

Pondering third party success

thenassauguardian editorial


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Aug 15, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

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

Branville McCartney and the question of experience

Front Porch

BY SIMON



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

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

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

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

XENOPHOBIC

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

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

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

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

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

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

MISPERCEPTIONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

EXPERIENCED

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

frontporchguardian@gmail.com

bahamapundit.com

Aug 09, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Branville McCartney - founder of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party is so anxious to become the next prime minister of The Bahamas that he is willing to use the sorry plight of illegal Haitians, and their Bahamian-born children to pander to the fears of voting Bahamians

tribune242 editorial


IT IS a tragedy when a politician, so anxious to win an election, panders to the base emotions of an electorate. And in doing so ignores the damaging consequences that his divisive message could have, not only on this generation, but on many generations to come.

Apparently Mr Branville McCartney is so anxious to become the next prime minister of this country that he is willing to use the sorry plight of illegal Haitians, and their Bahamian-born children to pander to the fears of voting Bahamians. Such a campaign of hatred will not only split this community, but will eventually build up such an emotional force that when it breaks in years to come this nation's way of life would be completely destroyed.

One would have thought that the mass killing that targeted young teenagers in Norway these past few days would have been a sufficient tragedy to send a warning signal of what can happen when suspicion and division is built up in a community. Such an atmosphere can inspire one madman to destroy a nation's whole way of life.

Seventy-six people -- most of them teenagers -- were killed in Oslo last week because of one man's fear that Islam threatened Europe's Christian culture. Anders Hering Breivik, himself a young man, was against his country's "multiculturalism," which he believed enabled "the ongoing Islamic colonisation of Europe." And so he wrote a 1,500 page treaties on his beliefs, pleaded not guilty to committing any crime, and almost gloated over the killings, because as a self-proclaimed Christian nationalist he believed it his duty to recreate a Knights Templar in Europe to fight a holy war against Islam.

This bizarre behaviour is usually the end game in an atmosphere of hate and suspicion that can send evil sparks flying in a madman's fevered brain. One only has to read history to understand the underlying racial hatred that has sparked centuries of unrest and most of this world's wars.

Mr McCartney, founder of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), which he promises will be the next government, says that he will fight to change the country's constitution so that children born here to illegal immigrants will not be eligible for citizenship. If elected he will push for a referendum to carry out his plans.

Under the constitution, persons who are born in the Bahamas to illegal immigrants have the right to apply for citizenship between their 18th and 19th birthdays.

We agree with former PLP cabinet minister George Smith who accused Mr McCartney of "trying to pander to the xenophobia of many Bahamians who want to blame some of our social ills on people who by virtue of their circumstances find themselves in the Bahamas illegally."

And warned Mr Smith: "Political leaders should never pander to ignorance and people who are motivated by fear and this is probably what Mr McCartney... is doing."

We agree with Mr Smith. We also agree with retired Anglican Archbishop Drexel Gomez who sees Mr McCartney's "final solution" for Haitian children as "inhumane."

"I cannot understand anyone who is going to seek leadership in this country who is not going to deal with the situation in a humanitarian way," said the Archbishop.

And it is true what the Archbishop says. This country does owe much to immigrants. Many immigrants -- teachers, policemen, doctors and nurses -- helped build the Bahamas. Many of them came as immigrants from other Caribbean islands -- and never forget: our first black member of parliament was a Haitian.

As the Archbishop pointed out these children up to the age of 18 have known no other home.

They speak our language, they belong to our culture, their friends are Bahamian. As far as they are concerned they are also Bahamian. At the age of 18 are they to be thrown into a world that they do not know, because of the myopic prejudice of Bahamians who just a few generations before were also foreigners in a foreign land? Many of the forebears of our present Bahamians were not even born here, yet they became one with us -- flesh of the same flesh -- and put much effort into the building of this nation. What none of us must forget is at some stage or another -- and this includes Mr McCartney -- our forebears were strangers in a foreign land. Today we are all Bahamians. Were our forebears more humane than we are today?

Yes, the Haitian question is a troubling one, but Mr McCartney's solution lacks humanity. It is not the right way to go, and if through this election he builds up an even greater foreign phobia, future generations will not bless his name for lighting a spark that allowed hatred to spiral out of control.

July 29, 2011

tribune242 editorial

Caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party says: ...Bahamians are feeling more and more that persons who are in The Bahamas illegally seem to have more rights and privileges than they do

DNA 'furious' about illegal immigration problem

tribune242



THE Democratic National Alliance said it is furious that the illegal immigration problem has been allowed to grow to such an extent that Bahamians feel they are "second, third and even fourth class citizens in their own country".

The newly launched party issued statement yesterday saying it believes Bahamians deserve "better treatment" and called on the government to put its people first - in all things.

The DNA said: "The party, along with scores of Bahamians across the length and breadth of the Bahamas, is increasingly troubled by the government of the Bahamas' attempt to secretly regularise thousands of non-Bahamians during an elections season, while at the same time admittedly following the fashion of the Christie administration and its old 'land give-away' practices."

The party was referring to the announcement that the government is working to regularise 1,300 foreign nationals whose applications have been "gathering dust" for years.

The government also said it would sell the track of land known as Mackey Yard - formerly the site of a shanty town - to Bahamians, but that former Bahamian squatters would get first preference.

This has led to speculation that the government is regularising former Haitian squatters in order to sell them the land, in return for political support.

The FNM had denied this, pointing out that both initiatives follow established procedure and that the former PLP government actually regularised more foreigners during its last term than the present administration.

It was also announced that none of the former squatters have actually applied for the Mackey Yard land.

Nevertheless, according to the DNA, as a result of these initiatives, "Bahamians are feeling more and more that persons who are here illegally seem to have more rights and privileges than they do".

The party claimed the government allows illegals to:

* squat on land illegally
* use electricity illegally
* sell products without the proper business licenses
* set up businesses without permission
* build structures without permission

The DNA also called on the government to identify those who they intend to sell the Mackey Yard land to, state whether these persons are citizens by birth or recently regularised, and if they were regularised, when.

The party also asked the government to reveal how many Bahamians are waiting to buy land from the government, and say how long they have been on the waiting list.

DNA leader, Branville McCartney, said that during his time as minister of state for immigration, he tried to create a unit to humanely remove shanty towns.

"My hands were practically tied and I met stern objection to this initiative," Mr McCartney said. "I was told that I was grandstanding."

Mr McCartney told The Tribune yesterday this one of the reasons he quit the FNM.

July 21, 2011

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party says that it is "gravely concerned" about the government's move to regularise 1,300 foreigners this close to a national election, as it could be seen as "nothing more than a political ploy aimed at securing votes, as they desperately seek to remain in power."

DNA leader hits out at the Immigration Department

tribune242



THE Democratic National Alliance has again hit out at the Department of Immigration - this time complaining that citizen classes left in place by DNA leader Branville McCartney are being "circumvented" in the regularisation of thousands of immigrants.

Mr McCartney, who served as minister of state for immigration under the FNM before breaking with the governing party, issued a statement yesterday saying the classes would have ensured applicants could speak English, recite the national anthem and pledge of allegiance, and had an appreciation of Bahamian culture, our national heroes and "various other vital aspects of our country."

However, in an earlier interview, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Immigration Brent Symonette said the classes stopped while Mr McCartney was still minister of state.

In any case, Mr Symonette said, the classes were only "a one-morning issue" and not a comprehensive programme that lasted weeks.

Nevertheless, the DNA says it is "gravely concerned" about the government's move to regularise 1,300 foreigners this close to a nation election, as it could be seen as "nothing more than a political ploy aimed at securing votes, as they desperately seek to remain in power."

The party said the claim that the government's only motivation is the fact that the immigrants' files have been languishing in filing cabinets for years, is an "insult to the intelligence of the average thinking Bahamian."

"Answers like these continue to give the impression that the government feels as if it can get any old thing past the Bahamian people, as it has been doing for many years."

The DNA challenged the government to put Bahamians first in their thought process, and - in the absence of the Freedom of Information Act that it promised to enact before the end of its term in office - give an account to the Bahamian people of how many non-Bahamians have been regularised in the past year.

July 19, 2011

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International