Dr Duane Sands’ resignation is unprecedented in The Bahamas parliamentary history - in significance and substance

THE MEANING OF THE DR SANDS’ AFFAIR! 

By Gilbert Morris:


This is how one should think about The Hon. Dr Duane Sands MP’s departure:

First, overall - I speak here of the public handwringing and heaving hosannas - it’s really much ado about nothing...as large numbers of Bahamians are about to starve.

Second, As a specific matter, Dr Sands’ resignation is unprecedented in our parliamentary history in significance and substance.

Third, significantly, Dr Sands breached the rules - with the assistance of other ministers - but importantly not to benefit himself or friends. That is a clear significant distinction from previous breaches where a minister would have had his lackey junglisses selling those swabs on the streets!

Dr Sands, it is clear to see was desperately singleminded in getting the swabs for the legitimate purposes. (For those who refuse to think, I hope you can see, I’m not absolving him of breaching the rules, (Aristotle said reasons for errors matter), as such I am merely pointing out that his purposes were legitimate, which has hardly ever been the case so far as I can recall).

What it means is if we are now going to enforce rules against persons with clear good intentions, then every breach of rules must be addressed throughout all of government!

Fourth, in substance, Dr Sands letter is a study in the proper way to apologise in public office. (a.) He took responsibility, (b.) then explained his state of mind, (c.) But didn’t use his state of mind as an excuse, proof of which is offering his resignation after explaining his thinking and objectives.

This constitutes an act of the finest ministerial propriety.

Finally, when a Minister acts in significance and substance as Dr Sands did though it’s hard, it’s still the prerogative of any Prime Minister to accept the resignation. The problem is it forces a “strict adherence rule” (Think of Shylock’s “pound of flesh” in Shakespeare’s “Merchant of Venice”): that means any other Minister who aided his - since we are enforcing rules with no mercy for legitimate intent - they should also be disciplined.

Moreover, we must understand how LAW IS REFLEXIVE: that means every act (Dr Sands’) and every decision (Dr Minnis’) establishes a standard that must be maintained. Dr Sands’s act and the Prime Minister’s acceptance establishes a foundation for rule-following and everything and everyone afoul of such rules rendering it frowsy with uncertainty must be dismantled, dismissed, or disciplined respectively.

So that means every police officer or civil servant on duty without a mask or any public official who breaches the rule should be disciplined, because that is the benchmark that Dr Sands’s act of grace and the Prime Minister’s acceptance establishes.

It also means any elected person with a conflict of interest or an undeclared interest or any arrangement that amounts to an untendered advantage must also be squashed!

Source

Dr. Duane Sands on modernized views on abortion ...after physicians in The Bahamas were accused of profiting from conducting illegal abortions in the country

Dr Sands Joins Call For Dialogue On Abortion

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Staff Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

WOMEN should not be forced to break the law in order to exercise rights over their own body, according to Dr Duane Sands, who yesterday joined activists in their call for national dialogue on the abortion issue.

 

Dr Sands spoke to the need for modernized views on abortion after South Beach MP Cleola Hamilton accused physicians of profiting from conducting illegal abortions in the country.

 

During her contribution to the stem cell debate on Wednesday, Ms Hamilton told parliamentarians that the practice was rampant, unchecked, and lucrative.

 

Dr Sands said he felt that Ms Hamilton “sucker punched” the medical community, instead of taking a “responsible” approach and initiating national consultation on the issue.

 

He charged that the current legislative environment created an economic disparity between those who can access legal services in other jurisdictions, and those relegated to “community abortions”.

 

“This is a conversation that as a people we simply have not had in terms of a woman’s right to choose, and so we pretend that Bahamians don’t have sex, we pretend that they don’t have unprotected sex, we pretend that they don’t get pregnant, and we certainly pretend that they don’t have abortions,” said Dr Sands, admitting that his strong stance on the issue could harm his political future.

 

He said: “(Hamilton) raised a very important issue in the Bahamas and it is one of the serious issues that we need to contend with at the age of 40. In the Bahamas it is said that numbers is illegal and yet you have web shops on virtually every street corner in the inner city.”

 

The decision of whether or not a woman has the right to decide to bring a pregnancy to term is an intensely controversial, moral and legal issue in many parts of the world. While abortions are legal in the United States, some states have varying regulations.

 

A major argument against outlawing the practice is that it increases the rate of unsafe abortions, and ultimately maternal deaths.

 

In an interview with The Tribune, Bahamas Crisis Centre director Dr Sandra Patterson explained that victims of rape and incest should not have to depend on a physician’s “goodwill” or legal interpretation to terminate a resulting pregnancy.

 

Dr Patterson said: “Women should have the choice, when they don’t have the choice awful things happen like abandonment of children, and unsafe abortions. It’s time for us to be talking about that and looking into legal provisions that could provide conditions under which it would be available instead of leaving it up to a doctor’s goodwill.

 

“If you’re an incest victim,” she said, “you miss your period and you tell someone about it, if you don’t want to have that baby you shouldn’t have to do it, and you shouldn’t only be able to have it because you have money and can pay a private physician to do it.”

 

In a report submitted by the government last year to the international committee of the United Nations governing discrimination against women, it was revealed that officials are aware of cases where licensed physicians perform abortions in private and public hospitals for justifiable reasons.

 

The report stated that the code does not define what constitutes medical or surgical treatment, and in practice, the law is interpreted very liberally.

 

The report was presented in compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), an international human rights treaty that focuses on women’s rights and women’s issues worldwide, ratified by the Bahamas in 1993.

 

According to a Tribune feature article on the report, the CEDAW committee expressed concerns over the government’s failure to provide statistics on state-sanctioned abortions, and called on the government to “broaden the conditions under which abortions can be legally available.”

 

Abortion is criminalised in the Bahamas through the Penal Code of 1924; however it allows “for abortions to be lawfully permitted under specific circumstances relating explicitly to the preservation of the mental and physical health of the woman and to save the life of the woman.”

 

The law also states that acts that lead to an abortion or are intended to cause an abortion that are done “in good faith and without negligence for the purposes of medical or surgical treatment” are justifiable.

 

Dr Sands said: “I’m calling for a mature national conversation on a very challenging issue that has moral and religious implications, so that we can bring our current view into the 21st century.

 

“I am not suggesting that we are going to change our approach but I think that because this is such a political hot potato that nobody wants to touch it.”

 

He added: “We as a country have been prepared to sacrifice one or more 
young women every year on the altar of ‘I’m not touching that’.”

 

Melanie Griffin, Minister of Social Services, could not be reached for comment as she was out of the country.

 

Requests for comment from the Bahamas Medical Council were also not returned up to press time.

 

July 19, 2013

 

Tribune 242

 

Caribbean Blog International

 

Dr Duane Sands, the former chairman of Bahamas Mortgage Corporation (BMC) says: ...the newly-elected Christie administration's goal of building 1,300 new houses over its five-year term was "probably unachievable"... ...suggesting it should instead focus on continuing to reduce the Corporation's 35 per cent loan arrears rate

Gov't's 1300 Housing Goal 'Unachievable'


By NATARIO McKENZIE

Tribune Business Reporter

nmckenzie@tribunemedia.net

THE former Bahamas Mortgage Corporation (BMC) chairman yesterday said the newly-elected Christie administration's goal of building 1,300 new houses over its five-year term was "probably unachievable", suggesting it should instead focus on continuing to reduce the Corporation's 35 per cent loan arrears rate.

Dr Duane Sands told Tribune Business he was doubtful the BMC would be able to finance the aggressive housing initiative proposed by the newly appointed-housing minister, Kenred Dorsett, questioning: "Where is the money going to come from?"

Mr Dorsett, the minister of the environment and housing, recently said more than 1,300 government homes were expected to be built over the next five years.

But Dr Sands told Tribune Business that while the Bahamas Mortgage Corporation's financial standing had improved, he was doubtful it would be able to finance that many homes.

He explained: "It is difficult to imagine where the money is going to come from, because the Mortgage Corporation's financial standing - while improved - is not likely going to be strong enough to sustain that degree of new debt.

"If you have a deficit in the national Budget of $500-plus million in just this year alone, the likelihood that we are going to be able to afford any additional spending is going to be unlikely. I find it to be a very aggressive, ambitious and probably unachievable goal."

Dr Sands added: "I don't know where the money will come from. Floating more bonds means now that you have more guaranteed government debt. Unless they talk out of both sides of their mouth, talking about no new taxes and, at the same time, extending the government debt by new spending, I don't see how it is possible."

Dr Sands noted that the Mortgage Corporation's sinking fund is underfunded by millions of dollars. He said: "Serving that bond interest debt and bond maturity debt requires more money than the Mortgage Corporation takes in.

"The money is going to have to come from somewhere, and most likely the money is going to come from the taxpayers in some form or fashion, because the mortgage guarantee fund simply doesn't have enough money in it."

He added: "I have gone on record as saying he 2002-2007 programme was the most irresponsible use of money in the Mortgage Corporation's history. If you want to repeat that now, simply to say you have built so many houses, is unreasonable. Who is going to pay the bill?

"I would encourage them to continue to strengthen the position of the Bahamas Mortgage Corporation by aggressively pursuing some of the policies that have been shown to be effective, and which have reduced the arrears from 40 per cent to 35 per cent, as opposed to throwing caution to the wind."

Attempts to contact Mr Dorsett were unsuccessful up to press time.

June 08, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International