The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) on Value Added Tax (VAT) in The Bahamas

The PLP Unleashes the VAT BOMB!

With Value Added Tax (VAT) now just 4 months away, the legislative arm of the government has only now completed debate on the laws which will govern tax reform in the Bahamas.  In just 132 days, scores of businesses will be forced to confront the impact of the new taxes on their profit margins, which has raised concerns about further job losses and a deferment of new hires in an already struggling national economy.

True to form however, this Christie led administration has waited until the 11th hour to table, debate and pass the legislation making any real preparation on the part of the local business community, nearly impossible.  Even as Wednesday evening’s debate wrapped, scores of Bahamians in various sectors of society remain unclear about how this new tax will truly affect their lives.

Most noteworthy however, was Mr. Christie’s absence from the actual vote.  Billed as the cornerstone of the Prime Minister’s plans for fiscal reform in the Bahamas, VAT will have long lasting and far reaching implications for the citizenry of this country; however the PM’s failure to be present when the bill was passed displays a lack of focus and calls into question his commitment to providing economic stability.

Over the past few days, the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) has watched ministers of government attempt to defend the need for VAT by blaming the former administration for the country’s financial woes. While the Free National Movement (FNM) indeed played a key role in the mismanagement of the nation’s wealth, it is not a pattern of behavior limited only to that party. Successive governments – including the first Christie led government – have spent recklessly, borrowed without restraint and sold for little gain, invaluable natural resources. Now however, hardworking Bahamian families and businesses have left holding the bag. We, the people are now being forced to bear the burden of additional taxes in an environment where government officials, their friends, families and lovers are exempt.

The DNA questions whether or not these very members of parliament who have defended this new tax system even consulted with residents within their constituencies. Did they acquire feedback? Did they genuinely listen to and seek to address the myriad of concerns being expressed?

Parliamentarians are representatives OF THE PEOPLE; chosen BY THE PEOPLE, to represent the INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE. Elected officials are not simply put in power to push the agenda of any one political organization. Instead, they are mandated to outline the views of their constituents and ensure that the interests of those constituents are being served in way that pushes the country forward. If it is the intent of this administration to spark real progress, then Members of Parliament and Cabinet Ministers alike must listen to the voice of the electorate and make decisions which benefit the overwhelming majority.

After years of failing to adequately collect the taxes already on the books is this government really serious about reform or is this an easy way out solution? As has been recommended by countless local business leaders, the government must prove itself capable of recouping the millions already owed BEFORE they implement a new regime.

Before VAT, there must be a comprehensive and detailed education process, one which targets Bahamians at all educational, social, and economic levels to ensure that all Bahamians are fully aware of the impact of the new tax system.

Before VAT, the government MUST enact a Freedom of Information Act to ensure accountability at every level.

The country needs real leadership and good governance. The time for blind following and unwarranted political allegiances is OVER.

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is doubtful that this Perry Christie led Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration ...is capable ...or interested in keeping any of its promises to the Bahamian electorate

DNA says: PLP Late Again!

DNA Leader - Branville McCartney

The PLP’s approach to governance since taking office in 2012 has left much to be desired. In what has seemingly become their modus operandi, this government has proven time and time again that it is unfit to oversee the affairs of the nation. Despite numerous public assurances that they would aggressively tackle the country’s many pressing issues, this PLP administration has proven itself dysfunctional, unfocused and incompetent; failing to meet their own legislative deadlines on issues relative to tax reform, a Freedom of Information Act, gaming, crime and countless other policy initiatives such as job creation, all while reneging on the countless promises made while in opposition.

Most recently, the Minister responsible for referendums Bernard Nottage admitted the government’s failure to set a definitive date for the proposed constitutional referendum. Shortly after taking office, the Prime Minister offered grand pronouncements of the government’s plans in this regard in which he set a November 2013 date.

The Constitutional Commission headed by renowned local Attorney Sean McWeeny did an excellent job in securing public feedback and reviewing the various aspects of the constitution which deserved attention; eventually compiling an impressive and comprehensive report which was presented to the government well in advance of its initial target date. Their work is certainly to be commended. True to form however, Mr. Christie showed no follow through and was forced to push the date to June of 2014.

How disappointing! Rather than use the additional planning time wisely however, this administration has again squandered the better part of this year focusing on trivial and insignificant matters and will by all indications, be forced to postpone the vote for a second time. While these revelations are certainly disappointing, they are far from surprising, particularly considering the ineffective nature of this administration.

Would the additional time not been ideal to launch the promised education campaign on the issue? Where is the so called commitment which the Prime Minister pledged to removing all vestiges of discrimination against women from the country’s constitution? This apparent lack of focus and political will is only further evidence of the careless and flippant disregard the PLP and members of this administration have shown and continue to show for the contributions of Bahamian women in this country.

Further, the Bahamian public ought to be reminded that the former PLP Administration commissioned a constitutional Commission to review the Constitution headed by the late Paul Adderley. Recommendations were made and true to form NOTHING HAPPENED!

Even more disappointing, is the fact that this is not the first time that a Christie led government has floundered on the planning and execution of a referendum. One need only think back to the disastrous January 28, 2013 referendum on Gaming which was also delayed as a result of the government’s failure to plan appropriately. First, this administration failed to properly educate the voting public on the impact of a legalized web shop industry, while refusing to consider addressing existing laws which discriminate against Bahamians in their own country. Then, rather than respecting the wishes of the Bahamians who voted, this administration has shown a deep disrespect for the democratic process and has chosen to proceed with the legalization and regulation of the industry anyway.

The Democratic National Alliance is doubtful that this administration is capable or interested in keeping any of its promises to the electorate. It appears that the Prime Minister and his band of merry men have stopped caring about their duties for the betterment and advancement of the country. The government must get serious about its responsibilities and abandon this LATE AGAIN and less than mediocre style of governance. The Bahamian people must demand and expect good governance from the party they elected.

Branville McCartney
DNA Leader
Facebook

April 21, 2014

Women of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) find Leslie Miller’s girlfriend beating remarks in Parliament extremely offensive and disturbing

Do Our Parliamentarians Condone Abuse Against Women?

Leslie Miller’s recent comments from the floor of Parliament last week speak to an issue that women in this country, and around the world, have faced for decades. The idea that any sort of violence against women has become laughable to the nation’s legislators is unfortunate, unacceptable but sadly unsurprising. Gender based violence in the Bahamas is real. It is a reality with which hundreds of women and girls face every day and everywhere.

Sadly, women who are being abused by their husbands or boyfriends continue to remain silent living in fear of their abusers, many of whom are high profile individuals not unlike Mr. Leslie Miller himself. It is disappointing to know the very people that should advocate for stronger laws to protect the rights of women are the ones making a mockery of women, especially those who are “victims”.

Mr. Leslie Miller has since attempted to back pedal from his comments. At the time, the Tall Pines Member of Parliament was attempting to draw a comparison between the FNM’s self-proclaimed love of the country’s fishermen while likening it to a husband who daily beats his wife as a way of demonstrating his love. Those comments, he says, were made in jest. As a father and a grandfather, I wonder if Mr. Leslie Miller would find the abuse of his own daughters at the hand of someone else equally as amusing.

What is even more shameful is the number of Parliamentarians who laughed along with him and others, while female members of government remained silent. As President of the DNA Women’s Alliance, I find these remarks extremely offensive and disturbing. The fact that Mr. Leslie Miller was not rebuked in that moment also gives me cause for great concern.

We do not elect Members of Parliament to be regaled with stories about their distorted sexual relationships. We do not elect them to be comedians at the expense of Bahamian women. We elect them to defend the rights of ALL BAHAMIANS and with women making up a large section of the voting public, we elect them to defend the rights of ALL WOMEN.

Are these the types of persons whom PM Perry Christie has deemed fit to lead? Does he himself condone the disrespect of Bahamian women, many of whom voted for him during the last general election? We demand that Mr. Christie offer an explanation for his silence on this very serious issue. He too, must answer for his apparent inability to curb the inappropriate behavior of members of his own government.

Just over a month ago, the DNA Women’s Alliance launched a campaign to “Break the cycle of abuse on women and children”. The forum encouraged men and women to break the cycle of abuse by breaking the silence and speaking out against violence and reporting their abusers.

Perhaps Mr. Leslie Miller would do well to attend one such forum. Perhaps then, his hands as he put it would become tired or hurt, not from physically assaulting a woman, but rather from helping to build up the country’s communities. Perhaps Mr. Leslie Miller would prefer that the voting public gave him the ‘break’ which he asked for by having him removed as the representative for Tall Pines.

This is a very serious matter, and we expect our Members of Parliament to be in our corner, and support us on this matter. The women of the Bahamas are owed an apology, immediately. Point, Blank, Period.

Prodesta Moore
DNA Women’s Alliance President

March 06, 2014

Democratic National Alliance (DNA) on Facebook

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) on the Christie administration's deal with Bahamas Telecommunications Company Ltd (BTC) and Cable and Wireless

Bahamians are NO Fools!

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) is incredulouslydisappointed in the Christie administration, which, as failed negotiations withCable and Wireless further proves, continues to show no real plan forgovernance.

Many Bahamians voted for the Progressive Liberal Party onthe premise that Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) ownership would bereturned to them. They deserve an apology—one from the former Prime Ministerfor selling the corporation in the first place and one from the current PrimeMinister for selling such a far-fetched dream.

“Bahamians are no fools. They are no longer comforted bypromises that lack projection or feasible solutions. We deserve better. Wedeserve more. We deserve a government that can close the deal,” said Mr.McCartney.

Since the deal with BTC and Cable and Wireless took effect,Prime Minister Perry Christie blindly assured Bahamians that his Party could returnto them majority stake. However, according to a recent announcement, that didnot happen. “This is not surprising news” says DNA party leader BranvilleMcCartney “as, like many of their other initiatives, ending in complete andutter failure. Whether it’s the promiseof 10,000 jobs; the mortgage relief plan that provided no relief to anyone; thegaming referendum debacle or the proposed economy destroying VAT plan, thisgovernment string of failures in less than two years is the only recordbreaking thing they’ve done, unmatched by any government in our past.”

The past government sold BTC under such clauses that wereindefinitely irreversible. However, theChristie government has proved that they and the former Ingraham Administrationare two sides of the same coin. Theyboth seem to believe that government ownership of 49% equates to majorityownership.

“While we appreciate that BTC has pledged to give a littlemore in charitable donations, 2% is not a huge break considering that BTC isalready a major sponsor of most national events and initiatives,” said Mr.McCartney.

The DNA is demanding that the government, or BTC, share withthe public the value of what has been given to charitable organizations in 2013and the value of the 2% promised.

The Government is searching for answers in the darkness,wasting time and taxpayer dollars on schemes that result in no wins for theBahamian people. Crime worsens, unemployment rises and regrets soar, asadmitted by Mr. Christie, himself.

Perhaps now Mr. Christie can use his time and resources toplot rational plans to combat crime, create jobs, relieve homeowners andbusiness owners, and explore reasonable tax alternatives. He owes taxpayersthat much. As of this day, the Christie administration is known as the governmentthat makes promises that they can not keep.

January 23, 2014

Democratic National Alliance (DNA)

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) says: Contradiction in The Christie Cabinet on Shantytown Crackdown

It was good to hear the Minister of Housing and Environment speak in the House of Assembly on the 13th June 2013 with such passion about the crackdown on shantytowns. The good Minister stated that there would be consequences for those persons who live in such areas if they are not operating within the law. He went on to outline the approach that this government intends to take regarding the notices that will be issued. Minister Dorsett said, “A copy of all of the notices we have served and will serve to the owners and occupiers of shantytowns by the Department of Environmental Health Services will be copied to the Ministry of Works and Urban Development, the Ministry of National Security and the Departments of Immigration and Social Services”.

This statement is certainly in contradiction to the Minister of Immigration’s position when he stated a few months ago that the issue of shantytowns is more complex than it seems because these communities have their “protectors through the elite class of the country”. The Minister of Immigration by his statement and indeed actions or lack thereof left the Bahamian people feeling that there was nothing that can be done by this administration about the shantytowns because of the so called “protectors” and “elites”. The fact of the matter is that nothing has been done about these shantytowns throughout the years and persons living there have been allowed to do whatever they wish! Simply put, administration after administration lacked the political will to rid our country of this vexing problem. And based on the Minister of Immigration’s statement, if these administrations have allowed shantytowns to develop without consequence because of these so called “protectors” and “elites” history would reflect that they have forever done this Commonwealth a tremendous disservice and will not be kind to them.

The statement by the Minister of Housing and Environment expressly states that some notices have already been served. The Democratic National Alliance wishes to know whether notices were served to date on these “protectors” and “elites” as described by the Minister of Immigration. Indeed, the Minister of Housing and Environment seems to indicate that they are aware of who are the owners of the land the shantytowns are on. If this is the case, then is the government willing to divulge who are these “protectors” and “elites” and what sanctions will the government levy against them? The DNA is of the view that many of these shantytowns are owned by prominent PLPs and FNMs, hence their unrestricted development over the years. The shantytowns were indeed “protected”. We await the Minister’s report on who these “protectors” and “elites” are. If we fail to hear from the government it can only be assumed that our assumption as to ownership is correct.

Alternatively, since there seems to be some contradiction in the Christie cabinet on shantytowns is this just pure talk by the Minister of Housing and Environment? Indeed, the country is aware that the PLP government is all talk but very little action. They demonstrated this in their last administration (2002 to 2007) and they are true to form thus far since coming to office in May 2012. Needless to say we have seen that they are the masters of promises. Are these comments by the Minister of Housing and Environment just another set of promises? Remember, that a promise is a comfort to a fool. This administration had “fooled us” in the recent general elections and based on their works thus far they continue to “fool us”. Fool me once...shame on you. Fool me twice…shame on me!

Branville McCartney
DNA Leader


June 16, 2013

Democratic National Alliance (DNA) on Facebook

Caribbean Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) says:... ...Despite all the talk to the contrary by Prime Minister Perry Christie and his administration in the past few months... the recent announcement in the House of Assembly on the proposed “numbers” referendum is the clearest indication ...and saddest reminder to the Bahamian public yet ...that this administration is in the hands and pockets of the illegal numbers’ men... December 3, 2012 will be nothing more than payback day for services rendered

DNA Chairman Calls December 3^rd Referendum Christie Administration’s Attempt to “Payback” for Numbers’ Support

Despite all the talk to the contrary by Prime Minister Christie and his administration in the past few months, the recent announcement in the House of Assembly on the proposed “numbers” referendum is the clearest indication and saddest reminder to the Bahamian public yet that this administration is in the hands and pockets of the illegal numbers’ men. December 3^rd will be nothing more than payback day for services rendered.

To reasonably thinking Bahamians who are taking note of the vamped up public relations campaign now underway by Mr. Christie and the numbers’ businesses whose cause he seems to be championing, it is obvious that they are betting on the ignorance and desperation of poor, downtrodden black Bahamians to get their “snake oil” remedy for our pressing social ills made legal. It is the DNA’s hope that Bahamians will not buy what they are selling.

This administration gave the Bahamian people a “snake oil” sales job during the election campaign, and for what they have gotten thus far, Bahamians are now having buyer’s remorse. It would be a shame if they fall for the same old fool talk coming from this administration on this issue as well.

If the choice is ours and Bahamians are supposed to be considering the legalization of “gambling” in the country, a national lottery should also be put on the table next to these illegal numbers operations for consideration as well. It is ridiculous to think that the numbers racket can rake up money enough to be a financially successful operation here in the Bahamas but a national lottery cannot. If Bahamians were to fall for this, the DNA wonders what other kinds of crazy Houdini act and ponzi schemes they would be willing to have this Prime Minister and his administration run on them again.

If the government says it stands to make upwards of $20 million in taxes annually, then that would mean that the take home profits for these numbers businesses can potentially run somewhere in the vicinity of $200 to $350 million a year. How is $20 million more beneficial to social development than $200 million? And if these numbers’ businesses can generate those kinds of revenue, then why can’t the government with its own National Lottery for education, sports, and social programs? Why should the government have it hands out waiting for proceeds when it can make its own proceeds?

It does not make sense that the government should only be concerned with getting proceeds from taxes to take care of social programming when it could control all the proceeds by simply enacting a national lottery – if it is going to make chance gaming legal. Again, for the most part, it does not make sense, and the Bahamian people should demand their government take its time and make sense out of this seeming idiocy. 

This administration used taxpayers’ dollars to have their British consultants come here to tell us a national lottery will not work “at this time;” now Bahamian people should demand that the Prime Minister’s office release the whole report so that we can all see how this hired group arrived at their conclusion - because the math just does not add up. It is time that we not allow our choices to be limited based on someone else’s reporting, unless we are privy to the report and can verify it as such. So we are calling on the Prime Minister to make the report public.

In their times of hardship and woe, the Bahamian people are looking to their government to come up with real and lasting solutions to their social pains. They no longer want governments who use their bully pulpit to continually shove choices on them that have no meaningful impact on their lives and their upward mobility.

More importantly, they are growing wearisome of this administration as it continues attempting to make a mockery of the system, them, and their constitutional rights as citizens of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. The DNA suggests that if this administration seriously cares about Bahamians it should demonstrate it by protecting their constitution right to free choice in their own country by offering them “free” choice.

If this Christie administration seeks to put to the Bahamian people any referendum on gambling that does not include a Bahamian’s right to gamble in the local casinos, any question that does not include a Bahamian National Lottery, as well as a question of whether they can own interest in chance gaming, then it continues to show its cowardice to do what is truly in the best interest of Bahamians. The DNA hopes that this second-chance Christie administration owns up and does bolster its reputation as a “sell-out/bought out” administration.

British physicist Stephen Hawking says that, as a people, “We are in danger of destroying ourselves by our greed and stupidity.” With each passing day leading to what has now gone from a proposed referendum on gambling to a referendum on legalizing the numbers business, we in the DNA hope that the Bahamian people will not become consumed – nor allow their government to have them become sufficiently consumed - by either greed or stupidity to prove Hawking’s theory correct. The future of a whole society is dependent on it.

We challenge Prime Minister Christie to reconsider his recent unashamed tactic to lead this cause for the legalization of the numbers business by playing on the nation’s emotional ignorance and fears of Bahamians. It not only comes across as unbecoming of a Prime Minister, but it also illuminates what most have come to fear - that this administration is indeed in bed with the persons who now run these illegal operations.
This administration can expect that, until such time as it puts to the Bahamian people a referendum that is reflective of real choice, it will continue to hear the DNA speak out and challenge them on this matter - right up to December 3^rd. 

Mark Humes
DNA Chairman

Tuesday November 06, 2012 - via e-mail

Caribbean Blog International

  

...many individuals continue to weigh in on the possible causes of the Free National Movement’s (FNM) defeat... the victory of Perry G. Christie and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)... and the Democratic National Alliance’s (DNA) impact on the 2012 general election

Why the FNM lost and the PLP won

By Arinthia S. Komolafe

Although the general election is over, arguably the election season is yet to come to a close.  There is at least one imminent by-election in North Abaco following the announcement by former Prime Minister Hubert A. Ingraham that he will resign from this seat on July 19, 2012.  Meanwhile many individuals continue to weigh in on the possible causes of the Free National Movement’s (FNM) defeat, the victory of Perry G. Christie and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and the Democratic National Alliance’s (DNA) impact.

It is apparent that a number of factors contributed to the FNM’s loss even though it is difficult to unequivocally state which particular issue impacted the voting population the most.  The most obvious contributors to the aforementioned defeat from a macro-economic perspective were the poor state of the economy, record unemployment levels, inflation, labor unrest, the perceived opaque immigration policy of the FNM government and rising crime levels.

It has been suggested that the FNM’s insistence on turning the entire election campaign into a leadership and/or personality contest between Ingraham and Christie played a significant role in the downfall of the FNM.  This coupled with what many deemed to be a growing tyrannical and dictatorial style of leadership by Ingraham is also being cited as part of the reasons for the FNM’s loss and the PLP’s landslide victory.  As can be expected, a rejection of Ingraham by the electorate would spell doom for the FNM.  The perceived incidents of fragmentation, scandals and corruption within the Ingraham administration that prompted voluntary or involuntary resignations of long-time politicians along with constituency reassignments also played a role in the outcome of the elections.

The Ingraham administration also had its fair share of controversy including the sale of the Bahamas Telecommunication Company (BTC) to a foreign-owned firm over and above Bahamians, significant cost overruns and delays in the New Providence Road Improvement Project that also contributed to the closure of several small to medium-sized businesses and the perpetuation of a monopoly of the nation’s most important gateway by way of a public-private partnership agreement to an elite group of families through the Arawak Port Development.

Notably, the FNM could also be accused of political tokenism – an exercise in which under-represented groups are placed in races that they have little or no chance of winning.  Arguably this occurred with some FNM newcomers and female candidates who were placed in historically PLP strongholds or incumbent constituencies.  The constituencies of Englerston, Bains Town and Grants Town, Centreville, Golden Gates, Tall Pines, Fox Hill and West Grand Bahama and Bimini readily come to mind.  These constituencies, for the most part, witnessed PLP candidates commanding the majority of the votes by a minimum margin of 645 to a maximum of approximately 1,390 votes.  As admitted by the FNM’s chairman, the party failed to attract the female vote – this in spite of the FNM’s impressive fielding of nine female candidates.  The PLP, however, fielded five female candidates, four of which were successful compared to one for the FNM.

Rejection

In the midst of it all, it appears that the electorate rejected the FNM’s approach to the myriad socio-economic issues that plagued the country during its term in office.  Further, on the campaign trail, the FNM’s message focused mainly on its delivery of infrastructure projects.  The FNM, however, failed to “touch the pulse” of the people who for the most part were suffering due to unemployment, the rising cost of energy, food prices, foreclosures and high taxes just to name a few.

Ingraham’s strategy of painting Christie as weak, indecisive, unable to control his ministers who were all eager to get their hands on the proverbial “cookie jar” was obviously ineffective and failed to resonate with an electorate that had become weary of that old form of “politicking”.

An analysis of the PLP’s modus operandi and efforts during the 2012 election campaign is imperative in order to complete this piece.  The former prime minister, the late Sir Lynden O. Pindling, in response to a question as to the reason for the PLP’s success at the polls was quoted in The National Observer’s January 14, 1967 edition as stating: “Organization, good candidates, red-hot issues, complete unity”.

The aforementioned quote can easily sum up the PLP’s 2012 election campaign.  It was clear from the beginning that the PLP led an organized campaign by campaigning on the issues that affected the Bahamian people the most – crime, economic recovery and job creation.  These were obvious issues in the wake of increased criminal activities, widespread economic hardship and joblessness.  Further, the PLP introduced what it coined as “a new generation of leaders” who in the run-up to the general election (when compared to their FNM counterparts) spent months to years on the ground in their respective constituencies, made many platform appearances at constituency office openings, rallies and the talk show circuit.  These provided them with opportunities for increased exposure and introduction to the electorate.

Finally, the success of any political party at the polls hinges on the ability of its members to be unified and stand together.  During the election campaign, the PLP spoke with one voice and had a common understanding which allowed for the resonance of its message.

As for the impact of the DNA, there are some 20 parliamentary seats that could have changed the results for the PLP or FNM but for the DNA’s presence.  However, the absence of the DNA may have also resulted in low voter turn-out in a general election that witnessed high voter registration with a record 172,000 voters.

The DNA’s showing was historic and impressive as it garnered approximately eight percent of the electoral vote, the highest by far for a third party.  The party’s presence deepened our democracy, provided voters with an alternative and forced the established parties to improve their political campaigns. Their future existence and relevance will depend on their commitment to “stay on the ground” and be a formidable opposition from the side-lines.

Considering the 14-year rise to power of the PLP and the 20-year journey of the FNM, it will benefit the DNA to study these parties’ voyages.  Invaluable lessons abound for the DNA in the successes and failures of the PLP and FNM in the past.  The DNA and its supporters should draw inspiration from the rise of the Liberal Democrats in the United Kingdom whose ascension in UK politics led to the Conservative/Liberal Democrats coalition in 2010, the first in Britain’s history since World War II.  The Liberal Democrats’ victory silenced naysayers that had asserted that third parties have no place in a Westminster system.  With a clear philosophy, purpose and perseverance, the DNA can hope for a similar testimony in future.

• Arinthia S. Komolafe is an attorney-at-law.  Comments can be directed at: commentary@komolafelaw.com

May 17, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

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

...the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) has tried to gain political mileage by stirring up a controversy over oil exploration in The Bahamas

Oil drilling in the Bahamas - the facts behind the scares

 

By LARRY SMITH:

 

 

IN RECENT weeks, the Democratic National Alliance has tried to gain political mileage by stirring up a controversy over oil exploration. But rather than focus on the very real substantive issues in a constructive way, they chose to launch a series of personal attacks and conspiracy charges.

In view of the enormous international pressures and revenues that can be expected, together with the dramatic changes to our way of life that are implicit in future oil production, not to mention the incredible pollution risks, it is worth taking a closer look at this issue - particularly in the context of the accusations of cover-ups and carve-ups.

Our original petroleum act was passed in 1945 to facilitate exploration by Gulf Oil, Standard Oil, Superior Oil and Shell. It was replaced by legislation enacted by the Pindling government in 1971, which came into effect seven years later and remains in force today.

The last exploratory well was drilled here in 1986 by a company called Tenneco, and while no commercial production followed from those early explorations, there were oil shows and most experts are convinced that large quantities of petroleum lie beneath our seabed.

The Christie government awarded a British group (later constituted as the Bahamas Petroleum Company) five new exploration licenses for just under four million acres in 2006. The licenses became effective just before the last general election in April 2007, when they were signed by the governor-general. And for the past several years, BPC has been conducting geophysical research in the Bahamas.

Now BPC says it is preparing to conduct appraisal drilling south of Andros, and the DNA thinks this amounts to a conspiracy involving secret deals. The party has set up a Facebook petition on oil exploration, asking Bahamians to sign "If you think we should control our resources to benefit all Bahamians, so we can demand answers before it's too late".

From the commentary it has made, the DNA is clearly not opposed to drilling, but is simply trying to stir the pot. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it depends on how it is done. Accuracy and honesty are important when making public statements on complex issues. Publishing false statements and facilitating wild allegations will lead to a rapid loss of credibility.

For example, according to the DNA, "this government negotiated a 12.5 per cent (royalty), one of the worst in any country". In fact, it was the Pindling government - back in 1971 - that set a then industry-standard minimum royalty rate of 12.5 per cent "of the selling value at the well-head of the petroleum won and saved from the licensed or leased area".

And, contrary to what the DNA now alleges, the licenses awarded to the Isle of Man-based Bahamas Petroleum Company in 2007, set a sliding scale of 12.5 to 25 per cent of production value, a fact which BPC clearly shows on its website.

Those licenses were never renewed, because the government imposed a moratorium on oil exploration in 2008, while efforts were made to pin down precise maritime boundaries with Cuba, the US and the UK/Turks & Caicos Islands. The boundary with Cuba - where four of the BPC licenses are located - was finalised last October.

In 2010 - following the catastrophic Gulf of Mexico oil spill - the government decided to step back and review the entire petroleum policy framework before allowing exploration to resume. The Ministry of the Environment also required all license holders and new applicants to produce environmental impact assessments for the areas they wished to explore.

There are currently seven approved licenses for oil exploration in Bahamian waters, and 10 applications for new licenses have been submitted since 2008. Five of the approved licenses are held by BPC. The other two are held by Liberty Oil, but were suspended because of the company's failure to remove a sunken vessel from an Abaco reef.

A US company called NPT Oil has applied for seven licenses covering more than six million acres north of Grand Bahama. NPT's Bahamian data and assets were recently acquired by Pennine Petroleum Corporation, an emerging oil and gas exploration and development company active in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

A Canadian geophysicist named Allan Spector has applied for an onshore license near Seymours on north Long Island. And a partnership between BPC and the Norwegian company Statoil has applied for three licenses covering more than 2.3 million acres near the Cay Sal bank.

DNA Montagu candidate Ben Albury - who has led the party's campaign on this issue - says he is simply demanding transparency and information. But he has also accused Environment Minister Earl Deveaux of gross malfeasance, without any evidence, and has succeeded in making the issue more opaque, rather than clearer, for the average Bahamian.

"My main issue," he told me over the weekend, "is the dodging of the questions by Deveaux. If you listen to his comments, he makes it sound as if there is a moratorium on oil exploration, (but) BPC is telling the media that they intend to drill in the coming months."

Albury cites a Miami Herald article published last October, in which Dr Paul Gucwa, BPC's chief operating officer, refers to plans for an exploratory well by the end of this year. "The Bahamian government has a moratorium on granting new exploration licenses," the Herald reported, "but... that could change following the country's May general elections. BPC has contacted 10 major international oil companies about partnering in its oil exploration operations."

A review of Deveaux's statements on this matter over many months, if not years, shows an entirely consistent position. He has repeatedly stated that the exploration freeze will remain in effect until an updated regulatory system has been put in place. He has also said that the present government is committed to the widest possible public consultation on the issue of oil production.

However, if you listen to the talk shows, some Bahamians are already gearing up to stop work and collect their "black gold" dividend cheques, while others are worried about secret backroom deals in which the well-connected carve up the country's seabed for their personal benefit.

Interestingly, there may be some truth to this. As mentioned earlier, experts have believed for decades that large quantities of oil and gas lie beneath the Bahamian seabed, and now that drilling technologies and market prices have reached the point where exploitation is not only feasible but profitable, we can reasonably project a massive influx of petroleum revenues in the near future.

But that is precisely why the government is seeking to overhaul our regulatory, legislative, environmental and financial regimes, in order to lay the groundwork for the orderly development of this industry (whether you like it or not). As Deveaux told me over the weekend: "Without detailing all the issues inherent in something so materially significant, it is a clear responsibility of the government to prepare the country for oil and its likely consequences."

The DNA appears to be confused because, under existing Bahamian law, licensees are required to drill an exploratory well within a certain timeframe - which in BPC's case is prior to April 2013 - or risk forfeiting their rights. The company says it has completed the required environmental impact assessment for this test well and is already working on a management plan.

Meanwhile, Environment Ministry officials have met with their counterparts in Norway to discuss revisions to the existing act and regulations, and consultants have produced working drafts for the government to review, after which they will go to the attorney-general. Deveaux says the proposed regulatory system will be included in his hand-over notes for the next government.

"Our visit to Norway in December was very useful and the government has agreed in principle to use that country's policies as a guide in developing a Bahamian petroleum industry," Deveaux said.

Norway began offshore petroleum production in 1971 and is now the world's seventh largest oil exporter and second largest gas exporter, with some 600 licenses awarded to a variety of companies. Norwegian officials have advised the Bahamas to have all the essential elements of oil and gas governance in place before any drilling begins. These include environmental, safety, tax, revenue, training and employment policies; contingency plans; and insurance requirements.

Norway's national petroleum policy seeks "to ensure long term management of, and value-creation from, the country's petroleum resources". Oil and gas activities are restricted to offshore waters, and all subsea resources are vested in the state, which is charged with managing them for the benefit of Norwegian society as a whole.

As we said, under the current Bahamian act, an exploration license includes an obligation to drill, and a bond must be posted to that effect as a way of precluding speculators. Exploration licenses are awarded for an initial term of three years, renewable for two successive three-year periods, but the 2008 moratorium meant that BPC's original license was put on hold and never technically renewed.

Similarly, if BPC's exploration is successful, current law says it is "entitled" to a renewable 30-year lease to begin commercial production. The royalty rate for production of oil and gas is based on a sliding scale of 12.5 to 25 per cent (from which the lease fee is deducted), with no other taxes or fees required. Equipment can also be imported duty-free.

On its website, BPC says that its license expires on April 26, and it has applied for renewal. The company notes that if it meets its obligations, "the governor-general shall renew the licences for another three years provided the company commits to drill an exploration well and (starts) the well before the end of the first renewal year, ie, by April 26, 2013".

So there is clearly some tension between the positions of the government and BPC, which claims to have invested $50 million so far to explore. Appraisal drilling is projected to cost several hundred million more, and obviously the company expects to benefit from this investment. But the petroleum act was written 40 years ago, and is silent on many of the complex issues the Bahamas would face as an oil producer.

Meanwhile, the DNA has rightly argued that oil drilling threatens two of the country's biggest industries - tourism and fishing. "(We) demand to know if Mr. Deveaux and the FNM government have ensured the protection of Bahamian interests," Ben Albury says. Well, the short answer is that Deveaux has repeatedly talked of the need to train Bahamians to manage a new regulatory environment.

"We have to come to the public with full information," Deveaux told me. "We want a standard of management similar to that of Norway. We need a petroleum directorate that is fully staffed with a range of expertise, including financial. If oil is produced we will be dealing with billions of dollars, changing the whole culture of the country and the way the government deals with money. It is no small thing."

In Norway, for example, surplus oil revenue is deposited in a $600 billion sovereign wealth fund so that the country's non-renewable resources can benefit future generations. The fund is managed by the central bank, under rules developed by the Ministry of Finance, and is responsible to parliament, with the interest used to cover government pension obligations.

Consultants have also advised the Bahamas to increase royalties and adopt profit sharing with oil companies in order to compensate for the absence of a corporate income tax.

As noted earlier, BPC's licenses were awarded by the Christie administration in 2006, and signed by former Governor-General Arthur Hanna in April, 2007. It is noteworthy that PLP candidate Jerome Gomez is the company's resident manager, former PLP cabinet minister Sean McWeeney is its senior counsel, and PLP deputy leader Brave Davis' law firm is the company's onshore legal advisor.

What is even more noteworthy is that the PLP has so far ignored this important public debate. The FNM's position is that "nothing can happen until the government approves and nothing will happen until there is public consultation". The DNA says it will hold a national referendum on oil exploration and production. The PLP is heavily conflicted in this matter and has said nothing.

Did someone mention carve-up and cover-up?

* What do you think? Send comments to larry@tribunemedia.net or visit www.bahamapundit.com.

March 21, 2012

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) seeks all Bahamian votes in the 2012 general election

by The Official Democratic National Alliance


Today’s headline by the Tribune, “Now DNA Seeks Haitian Votes” is very misleading to the Bahamian public, as it suggests an erroneous statement that the Party is underhandedly courting “the Haitian vote.” It would be wise to note that Haitians can only vote in Haiti. Bahamians vote in the Bahamas.

The Democratic National Alliance (DNA), with no other political party present, met with some Bahamian leaders of Haitian descent recently and we discussed the DNA’s policy on immigration, which was not altered from what was presented last year at a public DNA town meeting on immigration, on the Party’s website (www.mydnaparty.org) or as was presented recently at the DNA’s People’s Summit 2012.

It was a fruitful meeting and the DNA believes that it successfully explained to all in attendance that a DNA-government intends to adhere to the law, present a referendum to modernize the country’s regularization laws and remove political hindrances and corruption from the Department of Immigration. At no time did the meeting transform into a plea for votes. Our only focus was to reiterate to the group that the DNA would enforce the laws of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. In addition to:

· Use the most sophisticated technology to ensure that our borders are effectively patrolled.

· Bring the vexing illegal immigration problem in The Bahamas under control through intergovernmental cooperation and in accordance with international Human Rights Laws.

· Review the status of immigrants that have been in The Bahamas for long periods of time and are productive members of society with a view to regularization in accordance with current laws.

· Move with haste to consider the applications of persons entitled to apply for residency/citizenship.

· Move to regularize the status of children born abroad to Bahamian women by way for referendum.

We stand by our decision to denounce President Michel Martelly’s comments during his visit to the Bahamas as divisive and explosive, mainly because all voters are Bahamians and therefore their interests should reflect this country and not that of another. Further, the Free National Movement (FNM) should not have allowed President Martelly to make a state visit to the Bahamas during this charged political season. We feel that his visit was an election ploy engineered by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and the FNM, which backfired.

The DNA recognizes the vast contribution that Bahamians of Haitian origin continue to make to the Bahamian economy. We will work hand in hand with all Bahamians, no matter their origin, but we believe that a government has the unassailable responsibility to enforce the laws of the country.

February 29, 2012

mydnaparty.org

Caribbean Blog International

The facts of Haitian President Michel Martelly visit to The Bahamas have been twisted out of all proportion... not only by the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader - Bran McCartney... but by Opposition leader Perry Christie and his Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) colleagues

The Haitian president not invited - just passing through

tribune242 editorial




DNA LEADER Bran McCartney has called for the immediate resignation of Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, accusing him of committing treason for allowing Haitian President Michel Martelly not only to overnight in the Bahamas, but to meet with his nationals while here.

"We are calling for the immediate resignation of Hubert Alexander Ingraham," DNA leader Bran McCartney told the press. "He has shamelessly disgraced our nation, his authority and this nation's ideals. He has insulted our people and his post as CEO of the Bahamas. He should indeed bow his head and be cast out, as it is clear he has denounced his citizenship in order to put another country's interest before his own."

What a fiery young man Mr McCartney has turned out to be. The more he talks, the more he confirms our opinion that we are dealing with a political novice who needs much more time to mature. At this critical stage of our country's development, this is not the type of ill-informed leadership that is needed. It almost sounds as though we have a budding dictator on our hands.

The facts of the Martelly visit have been twisted out of all proportion, not only by Mr McCartney, but by Opposition leader Perry Christie and his colleagues.

To listen to them, one would have thought that Mr Ingraham had given President Martelly a script from which to read. Mr Ingraham did not invite the president to Nassau. He did not tell him that before he could talk to his own people he had to first submit a script of what he intended to say to the Bahamas government, and if he dared misstep he would be kicked out of the country. This certainly is not the procedure expected of a democratic country.

Mr McCartney also condemned Mr Christie for being "too quiet on this issue of national importance". We would have expected Mr Christie, a seasoned politician, to have continued his silence on the matter knowing the protocol of such visits. But not Mr Christie, he could not be seen by his supporters as being weak and so was goaded on to make himself look foolish. After all, it was Mr Christie and his party that seemed to take more of a personal interest in the President's presence than did Mr Ingraham and his government.

For example, no FNM politicians attended the Joe Farrington Road meeting when President Martelly addressed his people. However, there certainly were PLP politicians present that night, among them MP Alfred Sears, former PLP attorney general, and Dr Andre Rollins, PLP candidate for Fort Charlotte. And so, until he could read the news the next day, neither Mr Ingraham, nor any of his cabinet, knew what the Haitian president had said to the estimated 7,000 persons crowded around him that night.

Mr Ingraham officially met the president in his office the next morning -- before he had had an opportunity to be briefed on what had taken place the evening before. However, Mr Christie later in the day not only knew what had been said -- to which he now so strongly objects -- but entertained Mr Martelly at his home with several of his PLP colleagues around him. If Mr Christie, or any of his colleagues, had disagreed with anything that had been said the night before, it was there and then that they should have had a discussion and cleared the air. But no, Mr Christie had to jump on the political bandwagon and condemn the visit. Did he really believe in what he was saying from a public platform, or was it only after being accused of being "too quiet" that he spoke up?

President Martelly neither asked, nor did he need permission to visit the Bahamas.
Contrary to Mr McCartney's statement, the Bahamas government did not invite Mr Martelly to the Bahamas. The President's government notified Foreign Affairs that Mr Martelly would be passing through the Bahamas on his way to Mexico. While here, he wanted to meet with the Prime Minister and the Governor General. These meetings took place.

Mr Ingraham said that Mr Martelly needed no permission to meet with his people.
He pointed out that the PLP went to London to meet with "Bahamian students in connection with the election that is coming up to encourage them to support the PLP because they have overseas voting. They went to Jamaica to do the same thing. They went to Miami, Atlanta and, I believe, New York, etc. Do you think they asked President Barack Obama whether they could come and do that? Of course not. Did they ask Prime Minister Cameron of Great Britain? No, they didn't. Why should the Haitian or the Jamaican or anybody else need to ask us permission to do so? We are a free country. We are a democracy. And just as we are able to go to other people's country and meet with our nationals at any time of our choosing, why shouldn't they have the same right to do so in The Bahamas?"

However, Mr Ingraham did give Mr McCartney some sound advice.

"One of the things that young politicians and old politicians ought to do," he said, "is to establish themselves as credible persons; that you take steps to verify things before you make pronouncements. You don't go and shoot your mouth off and make statements that are untrue and that can easily be verified in advance. Carelessness is not a good thing for a young politician, or indeed an old politician. I caution Mr McCartney not to continue telling lies."

February 13, 2012

tribune242 editorial

Caribbean Blog International

As the slow times are not predicted to improve in the near future, Bahamians must now decide whether they want their future in the hands of an indecisive Perry Christie or a decisive Hubert Ingraham... ...As for the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), more experience is needed for the difficult times this country might have to face

Beware of election promises

tribune242 editorial




ELECTION TIME is here again and so are the promises. Promises, we might add, without any reference to the Public Treasury.

Bahamians should be aware of the times in which we live and don't depend on election promises -- even in good times they were just that -- promises that never saw the light of day.

In Grand Bahama, for example, Dr Michael Darville, the PLP's Pineridge candidate, has promised that should his party win the 2012 election, Grand Bahama will not only have a new hospital and all its medical facilities upgraded, but, according to Tanisha Tynes, PLP candidate for East Grand Bahama, her area will have its first junior high school.

National health insurance will be introduced to cover the medical needs of all Bahamians. Dr Darville said the PLP has also been working on a national plan to put the island back on the road to recovery through meaningful investments and programmes to create permanent jobs in tourism and the industrial and agricultural sectors.

It is true that Freeport's needs are great, but despite what PLP candidate Gregory Moss has said, the Bahamas (Grand Bahama included), like the rest of the world, is suffering, not only from its own inefficiencies, but from the global recession.

The World Economic Forum, holding its 42nd meeting in Davos, Switzerland, from January 25-29, closed its meeting on a sombre note. About 1,600 economic and political leaders, including 40 heads of state, discussed their fears that Europe's fiscal crisis could put the entire global economy into recession.

Despite the efforts of the Ministry of Tourism, if people have to cut back on their vacations because their finances are tight, this country's tourist dollar will shrink. Recently, Freeport's once bustling Container Port was forced to lay off several employees because one of its major Mediterranean clients, hit by the international economic situation and loss of business, had to reduce its services. The Hutchison Whampoa group also laid off about 72 employees as a part of its international downsizing "due to the economy and the resulting decline in business". In the UK, about 400 Hutchinson staff lost their jobs.

These layoffs were employees from the Grand Bahama Airport Company, the Freeport Harbour Company and the Freeport Container Port.

So it is wrong for any politician to deny that this country is not also caught up in a global downturn.

"The economy in Grand Bahama is at a place where we are not generating new jobs as fast as they are losing them," said Grand Bahama Chamber of Commerce president John Swain. And, unfortunately, with tourism slow and all tourism dependent businesses in the doldrums, there are few places in Grand Bahama to find work.

All eyes are now fixed on the USA in hopes of an economic improvement there, which might spill over onto Bahamian shores. Until this happens, no politician from any of the parties can make grand promises and try to make constituents believe they can keep them.

Why even in the good times -- before the economic bubble burst -- Mr Christie was unable to fulfil his election promises after he won the government in 2002. At that time, no one imagined that in a few more years the good times would come to a screeching halt.

In 2002, Mr Christie promised National Health Insurance, which even then the country could not afford. He was in government for five years and never delivered on the promised national insurance "so that poor people will stop dying simply because they are too poor to pay for medical attention". Also, before winning the government in 2002, he promised that if elected his government would "transform the hospital (PMH), the flagship for the entire health care system into the first class care facility that it has the potential to become", to "modernise the Sandilands Rehabilitation Centre" and develop a regional hospital in Exuma. None accomplished, and none attempted. They were only election promises.

If these promises could not be kept in the good times, why should voters believe that any political party can guarantee that they can be delivered in the bad times?

The unions, as was to be expected, want to get as much as they can now. They believe that if they don't get what they claim was promised them by the Ingraham government before the election, they will get nothing under the Christie government, should that government win the election. That is probably true. But what the unions have to understand is that no matter which party wins the government, the Public Treasury will dictate who will get salary increases and when.

The voter is now in a privileged position to judge the performances of two five-year term governments -- the Christie government in good times, and the Ingraham government in economically critical times.

As the slow times are not predicted to improve in the near future, Bahamians must now decide whether they want their future in the hands of an indecisive Christie or a decisive Ingraham. As for the DNA, more experience is needed for the difficult times this country might have to face.

February 02, 2012

tribune242 editorial

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