Showing posts with label Dr. Andre Rollins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr. Andre Rollins. Show all posts

Monday, January 21, 2013

Dr. Andre Rollins, Chairman of The Gaming Board says that: ... there is more to be gained from a yes vote than a no vote in the upcoming referendum

Gaming Chairman Pushes Yes Vote


By The Bahama Journal




Chairman of The Gaming Board Dr. Andre Rollins indicated yesterday that there is more to be gained from a yes vote than a no vote in the upcoming referendum.

Dr. Rollins in a press release pushed the benefits of a yes vote for The Bahamas saying that the revenue generated from taxing the activity presents greater results for the country.

While Dr. Rollins acknowledges that it has taken far too long for any government to gather the will power to take legal action against web shop gaming in The Bahamas, he claims that it cannot be argued that 50-plus years is insufficient time to know whether or not something should be regulated or taxed for the benefit of our country and people.

“Based on the long history of Bahamian participation in games of chance and the recognition that historical legal restrictions precipitated the creation of illegal gaming enterprises, it is inevitable that the demand for such activity will persist beyond January 28 even in the face of a no vote,” he said.

“The difference is that the government will be under greater pressure to use its law enforcement resources to respond to illegal gaming – resources that are scarce and themselves under increasing pressure to address the scourge of violent crime affecting parts of our country,” he added.

According to the chairman, regularised web shop gaming is critical for the country if it wishes to maintain its standing as a responsible financial services jurisdiction compliant with international anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism best practices.

“Our nation’s financial regulatory regime and the reporting requirements it imposes on businesses engaged in financial services, cannot be effective if it ignores a large group of businesses which conduct significant financial transactions,” he said.

“Our country must be seen to be continuing along a progressive path of reform not just in the eyes of the international community, but also in the eyes of our citizens. The government cannot be perceived as being guilty of engendering a culture where laws are selectively observed and applied; where law enforcement and not justice is blind,” he added.

The Gaming chairman claims that there are number of benefits for the government and the citizens alike to be gained from a ‘yes vote’ and that these ‘good causes’ must be identified.

Dr. Rollins said that regulating gaming for locals would be a new way for the government to create revenue which could be utilised for education purposes like schools and scholarships, healthcare, sports, the disabled, senior citizens, public housing and transportation, historic preservation and youth programmes.

If the outcome of the referendum is no, according to Dr. Rollins it will be an expression of the nation’s wish to deny Bahamians the right to participate in gaming, excluding those persons employed in hotel casinos.

“To continue to allow gaming houses in The Bahamas to exist without appropriate regulatory controls creates the potential for the infiltration of and control by criminal entities, which could very easily produce adverse domestic and international consequences,” he said.

“If Bahamians wish to have access to gaming as a form of entertainment it must be understood that it is unacceptable for it to continue in an unregulated manner. The position of this government must be clear: We cannot regulate the sector in part; it must be regulated as a whole,” he added.

The gambling referendum is scheduled for January 28th, with advanced voting today.

January 21, 2013

The Bahama Journal

Friday, April 22, 2011

Bahamian politics, politicians, pundits, pollsters, strange bedfellows and the next general election in The Bahamas

Politicians, pundits and pollsters

By Philip C. Galanis





With slightly more than one year, at most, before the general election must be called, the political temperature is already rising. In February this year, Dr. Andre Rollins resigned from the NDP, the political party he helped to create, and joined the PLP. He was quickly nominated to be the latter's standard bearer in the Fort Charlotte constituency.

In March, Branville McCartney, the FNM Member of Parliament for Bamboo Town, resigned from the governing Party and announced that his newly formed Democratic National Alliance (DNA) will contest the next elections with a full slate of candidates.

Not to be outdone or upstaged by Christie's PLP or Bran's DNA, last week Prime Minister Ingraham, with great fanfare and flanked by fellow-ministers and followers, welcomed Cassius Stuart, the Leader of the Bahamas Democratic Party, along with virtually his entire disbanded decade-old organization, into the Free National Movement. And let us not forget that one of the dailies predicted the imminent demise of the National Democratic Party, given the dissatisfaction with several of its leaders and disaffection from its ranks.

Meanwhile some Bahamian political spectators are virtually salivating in exuberant excitement and eager expectation to see which other veteran and wannabe politicians will be co-opted and who will defect from their current positions as this political ballet is choreographed and performed on the political stage. Perhaps as never before will the adage that "politics makes strange bedfellows" be corroborated as a truism in Bahamian politics — for the next few months, in any event.

Therefore this week, we would like to Consider This...what are we to make of the recent developments that have evoked such excitement on the domestic political landscape and what part do the pundits and pollsters play in this ever-growing drama we call Bahamian politics?

Politicians

It has become very clear that some of the recent novices and veterans in the political arena have now realized that they will continue to be marginalized by remaining on the periphery of the real political stage, outside the organizational mainstream of the two behemoths that are the PLP and the FNM. Accordingly, Dr. Andre Rollins and Cassius Stuart — along with almost his entire party — have determined to hitch their political fortunes to the major parties.

A frequently asked question regarding such political vacillations is whether those persons are really interested in improving the things that they have articulated to be wrong with both the country and the major political parties that up to one year ago they vehemently opposed, or are they more interested in their own political elevation and personal aggrandizement? Although Bran McCartney has taken a very different course, some will put the same question to him. Just how true they remain to their principles and fundamental positions will become more apparent in the fullness of time.

Pundits

The term "pundit" normally refers to one who regards himself as an expert in a particular subject and who offers his opinion or commentary to the public on that subject. Punditry has been applied to political analysis, the social sciences and sports. Traditionally, political pundits would include radio and television talk show hosts and their guests who are generally knowledgeable in such matters. Pundits also include newspaper and magazine columnists, most of whom, with the exception of the Scribe and Front Porch by Simon (both pseudonyms), have the courage of their convictions to identify themselves and stand by their positions, whether the public perceives their positions to be right, wrong or indifferent.

Pundits are often not necessarily scientific in their approach to political analysis, relying more on their intuition, a sixth sense, if you will, a historical frame of reference and even on their personal experience to explain the vicissitude of politics.

In a general sense, however, many Bahamians think of themselves as political pundits and equally possessed of the qualities that characterize those who more traditionally fit the definition. Virtually every Bahamian has a political opinion. Because Bahamians are generally well-informed on partisan and national issues, extremely interested in the body politic and politically astute, they are as eager to express their views as they are prepared to criticize or support government and opposition policies and decisions. And that is very healthy for our polity.

Pollsters

Pollsters on the other hand, as compared to pundits, attempt to provide a degree of scientific sophistry to political developments and issues of the day. An effective pollster will have a good understanding of mathematical and statistical methods to analyze and interpret events and to forecast outcomes. In short, pollsters have mastered the art that many politicians so often fail at. They actually ask people what they think about an issue, a policy or a national decision. Then they summarize the answers to the questions that they ask and present their findings based on what people actually think.

Some people are skeptical of pollsters, often objecting to the validity of the answers garnered from the poll, because the "doubting Thomases" question the veracity of persons whom they poll. It has often been suggested that Bahamians will provide the answers that they think the pollster is seeking rather than the truth of how the person polled actually feels.

However, there are techniques for pollsters to filter answers in order to arrive at a consensus position of persons who are polled. Furthermore, although polling in The Bahamas is a relatively new discipline, the politician who prefers to rely exclusively on his intuition or the “expertise” of the pundits do so at their peril. The fact of the matter is that politics has become more scientific in assessing public opinion and sentiment and polling has proven to be a very useful tool to accomplish that task.

Just this past week, the relatively new Bahamian market research firm, Public Domain, headed by Mwale Rahming, released the results of a poll that his firm conducted between February 16 and March 11, 2011. Public Domain indicated that 402 persons were polled, weighted by region, age and gender, in order to ensure that the population represented a good cross-section of the Bahamian adult population. The poll represented a five percent margin of error which is quite acceptable for such an exercise.

To the question: "If the election was held today, which party would you vote for?" the results were reminiscent of the Elizabeth bye-election. The respondents indicated that 28 percent would vote for the PLP and 25 percent for the FNM. What is even more revealing about that poll is that 21 percent indicated that they would vote for a third, unbranded party and 26 percent were undecided. The conclusion of that poll is that 47 percent, nearly one-half of the respondents, did not have an appetite for either the PLP or the FNM. The conclusion can be drawn from this is that there is a very large percentage of disaffected voters who are not happy with the two major parties. This confirms the perceptions of many political pundits.

Secondly, the respondents were asked "How satisfied are you with the current government led by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham?" The response was that 14 percent were very satisfied, 35 percent were somewhat satisfied for a total of 49 percent who were generally satisfied with the current government. Equally revealing was the conclusion that 21 percent were somewhat dissatisfied and another 25 percent were very dissatisfied for a total dissatisfaction rating of 46 percent. The remaining four percent did not know. This is very interesting when one considers how close today’s figures are to the percentage of voters who actually voted FNM in the last general election, nearly 49.82 percent, as compared to those who didn’t vote FNM but voted PLP, which was 46.98 percent.

Finally, to the question: "If a third political party presented a full slate of andidates with a mix of veteran and new candidates, how likely would you be to vote for this third party?" the responses were astounding. The response was that 32 percent were very likely to do so, 25 percent were somewhat likely to do so, for a total of 57 percent who said that they were likely to vote for a third party. In addition, 11 percent were not very likely to do so, while another 21 percent were not likely at all to vote for a third party, rendering a total of 32 percent who would not likely to vote for a third party. The remaining 11 percent did not know.

These poll results should give both the PLP and the FNM reason to be concerned about voter sentiment at this particular point in time and should also be very encouraging to Branville McCartney who, when this poll was conducted, had not yet announced that he would form a political party and that he would present a full slate of candidates in the upcoming elections.

Conclusion

We have always maintained that the next general election will be a close, fiercely contested and combative conflict. It is clear that politicians must fully understand the political landscape. The pundits will have much to talk and write about as the "silly season" unfolds, sharing their considered opinions and gut feelings with all and sundry. Finally, the pollsters will have an increasingly important role to play as they investigate and measure the actual feelings of voters, unraveling the variables and vicissitudes that will contribute to the success of the victor and failure of the vanquished in the next general election, whenever it is called.

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.

4/17/2011

thenassauguardian

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Dr. Duane Sands Dissatisfied With Elizabeth by-election Results

BY KENDENO N. KNOWLES:


He was declared the unofficial winner of the much anticipated and hotly contested Elizabeth by-election, but Free National Movement (FNM) candidate Dr. Duane Sands only won the election by one point – almost 300 votes less than Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham had previously predicted.

Dr. Sands admitted last night that he was not too happy with the way things went at the polls.

Slightly disappointed with the close finish at the polls, the FNM candidate said the results have left him with a bit of uncertainty.

"It is not the type of feeling that I would have hoped to have had at this point. I imagine that [Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) candidate] Ryan Pinder is feeling similarly and that is almost unsure of what [Wednesday] is going to bring," Dr. Sands said.

While uncertainty looms about who the official winner is up to this point, Dr. Sands said he feels that he is more or less in a better position that Mr. Pinder.

"I prefer, however, to be in a position where I am one point up as opposed to one point down. But to be quite honest with you this is not going to be the jubilant night that we all expected," he said.

The exhausting campaign trail took the FNM candidate from door-to-door in the Elizabeth constituency and even to the houses of those that did not support him.

Even with that, Dr. Sands said he never doubted his success at the polls.

"I never doubted that I would win this election, but, we always gave the voters the respect that they deserved and you can see that one vote made all the difference," he said.

The ballots are scheduled to be recounted today and there is a possibility that Mr. Pinder might be declared the official winner.

If he loses, Dr. Sands said he would focus his energy on running in the 2012 General Election.

"If I do not win it’ll be over at this point, but now we [will have to] get on with the business of taking care of the people’s needs in Elizabeth," he said.

"If I don’t win I will be back practicing medicine and will return to seek the seat in Elizabeth in the 2012 election."

Dr. Sands could not say whether he would reapply for the many government and private positions he resigned from in order to pursue a political career.

Meanwhile National Development Party (NDP) candidate Dr. Andre Rollins – whose performance at the polls rivaled the performance of the other third parties – pointed out that while the PLP and FNM may have been successful at the polls, there was a poor voter turnout.

That is something Dr. Rollins said shows how fed-up the people of Elizabeth and around the country really are with both parties’ performance.

"I think that the poor voter turnout is evidence that many Bahamians are displeased with what is in fact the state of the nation. I think that many persons stayed home despite the excitement that we feel was being generated on a national level," he said.

"By virtue of the poor voter turnout, I believe it implies that persons were not sufficiently motivated or stimulated enough by either of the mainstream political parties."

Dr. Rollins said a look at the votes garnered by the third parties would reveal that all three of the parties made an impact on this election.

February 17th, 2010

jonesbahamas

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Elizabeth by-election: Message sent by high number of absent Elizabeth voters

By Brent Dean ~ Guardian Senior Reporter ~ brentldean@nasguard.com:



The decision by more than 1,700 registered voters not to participate in the Elizabeth by-election may indicate that a significant block of Bahamians either rejected, or are not interested in, the message being offered by either the Free National Movement or the Progressive Liberal Party.

When the recount is over, the winner of the by-election would have received just over 30 percent of the registered votes in the area.

With the PLP and the FNM having national base support somewhere between 30 and 40 percent each, it appears that not even all of the faithful showed up to vote on Tuesday.

The Bahamas is going through one of its worse economic periods since Independence. As a result of the global recession thousands of Bahamians are out of work. The level of violent crime in the country has also hit record levels.

In this context, an opposition party should be able to defeat the governing party in a by-election, in a classic swing seat.

The Christie-led PLP could not do this.

Conversely, it could be argued that the FNM should have done better. The PLP has moved from controversy to controversy since the last general election.

One PLP member of Parliament (Kenyatta Gibson) crossed the floor of the House of Assembly and joined the FNM; another (Malcolm Adderley) resigned, criticizing Christie; and former party senator (Pleasant Bridgewater) is about to face retrial on attempted extortion charges.

Neither party could use the strong negatives against the other to distance itself in this race. The voters in this swing seat have perceived little to no difference between the major parties.

The Elizabeth vote should force both leaders back to the drawing board to find new messages, policies and platforms if they are serious about running in 2012.

The results show that the Elizabeth campaign did not inspire.

However, what the results also show is that no matter how dissatisfied Bahamians may be with the PLP and the FNM, they will not support a third party.

The youthful enthusiasm of Cassius Stuart and Dr. Andre Rollins should be applauded. But if either man wants to ever sit in the House, he must put on either a yellow or red shirt.

This deep conservatism - Bahamians not being willing to try a third force - has a consequence. If Bahamians will not vote for others, then there is no pressure on either the PLP or FNM to reform their message; and there is also no pressure on the major parties to change the faces that lead the organization.

In this equation the major parties only need to defeat each other rather than seek to court voters.

Some observers argue that the number of voters who did not show up on Tuesday is likely less that 1,700. It is true that some people on the 2007 register may have moved or died since then.

This, though, would only reduce the number of non-voters by a few hundred.

The PLP and FNM must now face the reality that the degree of voter apathy in Elizabeth may exist in swing seats across the country.

The parties must determine if their message (or messengers) no longer appeal to voters.

Now, a saving grace for the major parties may be that many Elizabeth voters stayed at home waiting for the next general election, as they know that Tuesday's result will not change the overall balance of power in Parliament.

February 18, 2010

thenassauguardian


Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Elizabeth by-election: 1,700 voters a no-show

By Krystel Rolle ~ Guardian Staff Reporter ~ krystel@nasguard.com:


More than 1,700 people registered to vote in yesterday's historic by-election were a no-show.

There are 4,943 people on the register. However, according to the unofficial figures only 3,210 people cast their votes yesterday.

In addition to the Progressive Liberal Party's Ryan Pinder and the Free National Movement's Dr. Duane Sands, candidates in the by-election included Bahamas Democratic Movement leader Cassius Stuart, Workers Party leader Rodney Moncur and National Development Party chairman Dr. Andre Rollins.

The unofficial results show that Sands received 1,501 votes, Pinder got 1,500 votes, Stuart got 115 votes, Rollins received 73 votes and Moncur got 21 votes.

The Elizabeth seat became vacant last month when former PLP MP Malcolm Adderley resigned from the House of Assembly. He also resigned from the party.

In polling division number one, Sands received 108 votes; Pinder got 91 votes; Stuart got nine votes; Rollins received four votes and Moncur got two votes.

In polling division number two, Pinder received 145 votes; Sands got 111 votes; Stuart received five votes; Rollins got three votes while Moncur did not get any votes.

In polling division number three, Pinder got 141 votes; Sands received 134 votes; Stuart got 14 votes; Rollins got eight votes and Moncur got three votes.

In polling division number four, Sands received 188 votes; Pinder got 164 votes; Rollins got nine votes; Stuart got six votes, and Moncur received three votes.

In polling division number five, Sands got 106 votes; Pinder received 62 votes; Stuart received 16 votes; Rollins received six votes and Moncur got one vote.

In polling division number six, Sands got 157 votes; Pinder received 121 votes; Rollins got 11 votes; Stuart got nine votes and Moncur received one vote.

In polling division number seven, Pinder received 129 votes; Sands got 123 votes; Stuart and Rollins got two votes each, and Moncur got one vote.

In polling division number eight, Sands got 129 votes; Pinder received 106 votes; Stuart got nine votes; Rollins got five votes and Moncur got three votes.

In polling division number nine, Pinder got 86 votes; Sands got 85 votes; Stuart received 11 votes; Rollins received six votes and Moncur got two votes.

In polling division number 10, Pinder got 168 votes; Sands got 130 votes; Rollins got 12 votes; Stuart received 10 votes and Moncur got four votes.

In polling division number 11, Pinder got 164 votes; Sands received 122 votes; Stuart got 13 votes; Rollins got six votes while Moncur didn't get any votes.

In polling division number 12, Pinder received 123 votes; Sands got 108 votes; Stuart got 11 votes and Moncur and Rollins got one vote each.

Returning Officer Jack Thompson said five of Pinder's votes were challenged and were not counted last night.

Thompson added that one of Stuart's votes was also challenged.

Election officials will recount the ballots today.

February 17, 2010

thenassauguardian

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Elizabeth by-election candidates declare assets

By Juan Mccartney ~ Guardian Senior Reporter ~ juan@nasguard.com:



Two of the five men vying for the Elizabeth seat in the February 16 by-election are millionaires, while one is in arrears with at least two government agencies, according to their declarations of assets that were gazetted in yesterday's edition of The Nassau Guardian.

The wealthiest of the five candidates running is Dr. Duane Sands, who is running on the Free National Movement ticket. Dr. Sands, a heart surgeon who is chief of surgery at the Princess Margaret Hospital, declared a net worth of $6.785 million.

Dr. Sands reportedly earns $455,000 per year and has extensive real estate holdings, as well as more than $3 million in equity in his medical practice.

The second wealthiest man on the list of candidates is Bahamas Democratic Movement (BDM) leader and business consultant Cassius Stuart. His net worth is listed at around $1.16 million dollars.

Stuart claimed to have more than $500,000 in real estate holdings, and about the same in the cash value of his life insurance policy. Stuart claimed an annual income of about $140,000.

Not too far behind Stuart is Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) candidate and tax attorney Ryan Pinder.

The 34-year-old's net worth is listed at just under $750,000.

Pinder, who claimed to bring in $220,000 per year, has about $900,000 in real estate holdings, but claimed mortgages on those holdings in excess of $725,000.

National Development Party (NDP) candidate and orthodontist Dr. Andre Rollins claimed a net worth of about $142,000.

That amount should put Rollins at the bottom of the list.

However, Rollins claimed nearly $1 million in assets, but it appears that hefty mortgages are affecting his bottom line.

Rollins claimed that he brings in about $80,000 a year.

Workers party leader and taxi driver Rodney Moncur, whose net worth is reportedly $152,000, should actually place him fourth on the list.

But Moncur's assets are nowhere near those of the other candidates.

In terms of income, Moncur claimed that he brings in about $615 per year.

And unlike his counterparts, Moncur also listed the individual value of his personal property.

Among that property is a dictionary he claims is worth five hundred dollars, as well as assorted fruit trees valued at $386 dollars. Moncur also claims to be in arrears with the Bahamas Mortgage Corporation and the Bahamas Electricity Corporation (BEC) to the tune of $1,200 each.

Parliamentary Commissioner Errol Bethel said the asset declarations are necessary so as to ensure that nominees who are participating in the race disclose everything about their financial lives to the public.

"We want to make sure that the nominees who are running are people who we can look up to as honorable persons," Bethel said yesterday. "And they are required by law to make a declaration as to what their assets are when they nominate for Parliament. The important thing is that people should be honest with these declarations. That's the most important thing."

Bethel admitted yesterday that the system of disclosure is not foolproof. He said there is no mechanism in place for the Parliamentary Registration Department to find out if a person is bankrupt, which would automatically disqualify them from being a member of Parliament.

"Nobody is bankrupt as far as we're concerned," he said. "Unless the person has actually been declared bankrupt. So when the person presents himself to us, the requirement of the law is that he presents certain documents and once those documents are in order and he presents the nomination fee ($400), then he is accepted as a candidate. And once the returning officer accepts these documents, then the person stands nominated as a candidate for the election."

As far as the validity of the declaration is concerned, Bethel said, "We don't do anything to verify that."

"There is a commission of public disclosure and if anybody is to check into that, it would be that body," he said. "But definitely not us."


February 2, 2010

thenassauguardian