Many of the progressive dreams of Edmund Moxey and others were interwoven with the struggle for majority rule and became synonymous with the early Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)... It is telling, therefore, that the majority of those elected in 1967 as a part of the first PLP government eventually left the party... including Ed Moxey

Jumbey Village – Montage of a Dream Deferred

Front Porch

By Simon

Edmund Moxey’s contribution to the social, cultural, economic and political advancement of Bahamians found magnificent expression in Jumbey Village.  The new documentary on the creation and destruction of Jumbey Village chronicles some of our post-independence history.

Some of the dreams of Ed Moxey became manifest.  Still, many of his dreams were deferred, like a raisin in the sun, calling to mind the memorable poem by Langston Hughes.  In his book-length poem suite, “Montage of a Dream Deferred”, Hughes asks, What happens to a dream deferred?

“Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun?

Or fester like a sore– And then run?

Does it stink like rotten meat?

Or crust and sugar over– like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?”

Many of the progressive dreams of Edmund Moxey and others were interwoven with the struggle for majority rule and became synonymous with the early Progressive Liberal Party (PLP). It is telling, therefore, that the majority of those elected in 1967 as a part of the first PLP government eventually left the party, including Ed Moxey.

Over the years other progressives left, including Dr. B. J. Nottage who later returned to the PLP, and Hubert Ingraham who did not. The PLP today is a shadow of its progressive roots. Its core leadership is non-progressive and reactionary, constantly stymieing the progressives in the party.

The National Committee for Positive Action (NCPA) was formalized in 1959 as a pressure group within the PLP to bolster the party’s progressive agenda and the struggle for majority rule.  The NCPA proved successful in its efforts, playing a pivotal role in the electoral success of the PLP.

Yet, the group’s ambitions were greater than winning an election.  With the majority secured they intended to transform life for the mass of Bahamians.  Some of their ideals were secured by the PLP, such as independence, the creation of various national institutions and early strides in areas such as education.

Disillusioned

Still, many of the progressives in the PLP, including much of the core of the NCPA, became quickly disillusioned by the cult of personality emerging around Sir Lynden Pindling, which was antithetical to their vision of collegiality.  The progressives were also troubled over the foot-dragging on urgent needs such as the urban redevelopment of Over-the-Hill.

Jumbey Village and other community projects were a part of Ed Moxey’s dream for the economic, social and cultural self-empowerment of Bahamians.  The physical demolition of Jumbey Village was emblematic of many other progressive dreams which were destroyed and denied by a once progressive PLP that lost its bearings and became enamored of power for its own sake.

It is one of those twists of history that some progressive movements which uproot the reigning oligarchy begin to mimic the very system they replace.  The PLP began mimicking the culture of economic and political entitlement of the Old Guard.  Today’s PLP Black Knights are in some ways yesterday’s Bay Street Boys.  They constitute the new oligarchy.

The rump of the old UBP did join the nascent Free National Movement (FNM).  But the core leadership of the FNM were among the more committed progressives and even so-called radicals who sacrificed much to bring about Majority Rule.

The departure of the Dissident Eight left the PLP less progressive, more reactionary, and engulfed by Sir Lynden’s cult of personality.  One prominent observer and politician remarked at the departure of the Dissident Eight that the party was losing its soul.

The brain trust of intellectually-gifted individuals who left the PLP included men with impeccable progressive credentials and commitment to the movement like Sir Cecil Wallace Whitfield, Warren Levarity, Sir Arthur Foulkes, Dr. Curtis McMillan and Carlton Francis.  The haemorrhage continued with the culturally-inspired Edmund Moxey and peaked with the departure of Hubert Ingraham.

Over the course of its 25-year rule the PLP became stagnant in terms of its intellectual culture, policies and programs.  The dream of the urban redevelopment of Over-the-Hill died.  This included the innovative urban and infrastructural plans by Columbia University and others, as well as the urgent need to upgrade the sewerage system Over-the-Hill.

Much of today’s urban plight and blight is the consequence of the failure to act by successive Pindling administrations. There were some efforts, but no real plan for transforming the urban landscape of traditional grassroots neighborhoods.  When Sir Lynden left office after a quarter century there were residents Over-the-Hill still relying on outside toilets.

The Urban Renewal program of the Christie government included a number of good elements.  Still, the program was a hodgepodge of ideas dating to the administrations of Sir Lynden and Mr. Ingraham. Mr. Christie’s efforts were welcome. But they were neither groundbreaking nor truly transformative.

Reactionary

Perry Christie has not proven to be a progressive.  Worse, he has demonstrated a reactionary worldview.  He is an ardent supporter of the death penalty.  In terms of economic policy Mr. Christie seems stuck in the past with an outdated mindset for economic development.

He advocated the large-scale anchor project concept of a by-gone era including the outrageous Mayaguana land giveaway.  He agreed to give Baha Mar far more concessions than any Bahamian government should have countenanced.

Mr. Christie successfully campaigned to defeat the proposed constitutional amendment to secure equality for women in terms of automatically passing on a certain right of citizenship.  Yet when he had a chance to make this right he did not reach for a legacy.

And he failed to introduce National Health Insurance.  It would have been a landmark accomplishment for him and the progressive movement.  Though Mr. Christie once served as minister of health, it was an Ingraham administration that significantly advanced access to free pre- and post-natal care for pregnant women.

Nor did Mr. Christie advance any major infrastructural projects Over-the-Hill.  Following the recent massive water works a lower income senior citizen in her 70s remarked favorably about the clear water gushing out of her pipes.  She has lived in Grants Town her entire life and has always voted PLP.   She never thought she would live to see the day when she would get that kind of water pressure  and clean water in Grants Town.

She is thankful to the government.  But she will never vote for the FNM. Better said, she will never vote against the PLP.   The pull is visceral, almost religious in nature.  It combines the iconography of Sir Lynden as Moses and the theme of liberation from Exodus in the Hebrew Scriptures.

For some, the idea of voting against the PLP is a betrayal of their self-identification as a black Bahamian.  This individual and social psychology is not only a Bahamian phenomenon.

Dependency

It is a mindset that behavioral and social psychologists as well as political scientists and sociologists have studied in many cultures.  It often involves a cycle of dependency and strong identification by some with a strongman leader, powerful organization or power structure.

In failing to transform Over-the-Hill during its 25 years in office, the PLP in significant ways betrayed many of its core grassroots supporters.  It is an observable fact that both Sir Lynden and Perry Christie failed to significantly improve conditions in South Andros, and Centreville and Farm Road respectively over the many years they represented these constituencies.

This, despite serving in government for decades, and as prime minister.  It is in marked contrast to the work Prime Minister Ingraham has done to dramatically upgrade the public amenities and services throughout Abaco.

Though the PLP created important national institutions, it generally failed to do likewise when it came to national cultural institutions.  In the post-independence period when Bahamians were forming a greater sense of national and cultural identity, important cultural institutions were absent.

Such centers of critical consciousness and cultural expression are necessary for nation-building.  Their absence during that formative period helped to retard our national development.

It was not until the FNM came to office that core institutions such as the National Art Gallery, the Antiquities, Monuments and Museum Corporation, the National Museum, and the Centre for Performing Arts were launched.  There is much work to be done to advance the missions and the reach of these institutions.  But they represent impressive strides.

So too are ideas recently advanced by Mr. Ingraham including a heritage tourism initiative, a public arts project, a parks and recreation authority and an oral history project, ‘Our Bahamian Stories’.

These all contain elements of Edmund Moxey’s dream.  But his dream is bigger still. He understood early that a place like Jumbey Village could help us to raise our children and uplift the Bahamian people.

There is planned for Big Pond a regional park.  Might the plans for that park include elements of the original concept for Jumbey Village?  The best way to honor Edmund Moxey is not solely in tributes.  The better way would be to revitalize and institutionalize his dreams.

Though the fruits of some of his dreams were destroyed, the seeds of his vision are still alive and can bear fruit.  It is possible to transform a dream deferred into realized hopes.  But it is too bad that we had to wait for so much to explode around us before we remembered the vitality and the urgency of the dreams of patriots like Ed Moxey.

Apr 03, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Mr. Edmund Moxey says that the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government's efforts to "suppress" Jumbey Village resulted from petty jealousies of individuals ...who believed that only they should be involved in certain activities of national importance

The destruction of Jumbey village

tribune242 editorial


"NO, I can't believe it - that can't be true!" This was Coconut Grove MP's Ed Moxey's shocked reply in May 1974 when a news reporter called to ask what he thought of a report that government had planned to build a replica of his Jumbey Village at Fort Charlotte. If true, this meant that the tourist dollar would remain on Bay Street and not flow to little businessmen Over the Hill where it was sorely needed. Mr Moxey knew that any development of Fort Charlotte would be in direct competition with Jumbey Village.

The whole idea of Jumbey Village -- built in 1971 on the reclaimed City Dump -- was to create a community centre with arts, crafts, music, a school, library, clinic, and social centre. It was to be an area, created by an indigenous people who hoped through their cultural programmes and craft work to attract tourists with their dollars to the village. When Mr Moxey was elected to the House in 1967, his belief was that the PLP was dedicated to providing a government "of the people, by the people, for the people."

In January 1975, Cat Island MP Oscar Johnson was to pour scorn on his government's "rich members who had forsaken over-the-hill" to dine on Cable Beach at the PLP's eighth anniversary celebrations. He reminded his party that over the hill was "the source of the PLP's strength." He warned that it could also be its eventual undoing.

In 1974, Mr Johnson told the PLP that 90 per cent of "black staff" working in the hotels lived over the hill, and from experience it was known that a "man with a toothache cannot smile." These were the areas, he said, that needed social change -- a change envisioned in the community concept of Jumbey Village.

That year, Mr Moxey and several (PLP) government members criticised their government in the House of Assembly because funds for the completion of Jumbey Village and the planned community youth programmes had not been included in the 1974 Budget. Nor was Jumbey Village included in the Ministry of Tourism's Goombay Summer programme -- a programme the Coconut Grove MP had suggested in 1972 should be held in Jumbey Village. His protest resulted in him receiving a personal letter from Prime Minister Pindling firing him as Parliamentary Secretary in the Ministry of Education and Culture with responsibility for community development.

Mr Moxey said that government's efforts to "suppress" Jumbey Village resulted from petty jealousies of individuals who believed that only they should be involved in certain activities of national importance.

In 1973, Mr Moxey had written a letter to then Deputy Prime Minister AD Hanna demanding a retraction and apology for statements Mr Hanna had made about him using slot machines for fund raising. Mr Moxey found his statements "maliciously designed to discredit me in the eyes of the public." Mr Moxey got no apology. Nor was his letter acknowledged.

And then a rumour was started.

"For months now," said Mr Moxey, "political elements have gone around in my constituency whispering about misconduct on my part when I was handling the birth of Jumbey Village. They talk about money. Well, the Ministry of Education and Culture investigated the matter and have found every single cent accounted for. The report was sent to Minister Livingston Coakley. For four months I have been asking him to release the report in order to clear up the matter. He has refused to do so."

Mr Moxey, like Carlton Francis after him, was a marked man. He had become too popular and, therefore, had to be consigned to the political graveyard. Jumbey Village eventually followed.

When government funds earmarked for the Village, but not fully used, were frozen, parents, teachers, and schoolchildren raised $90,000 to complete the museum.

"It would be a gross insult to them," Mr Moxey said, "to now duplicate a museum at Fort Charlotte."

Not to be left out, the late Wenfred "Sife" Heastie added his two cents to the debate. Mr Heastie was not only a staunch supporter and major financial contributor to the PLP, but he was also deputy prime minister A D Hanna's uncle.

"Ed," he said, "is the only man who did something personally in his district. He built a community centre and a day-care centre in his district and he built Jumbey Village out of the dump. They are jealous because the rest of them don't have a damn thing to show, except the new houses they moved into in the east and in the west."

He said the PLP government cut Jumbey Village from the development budget because "to get Ed Moxey out of the picture they have to let Jumbey Village die a natural death. If they cut off everything this will die and Ed will die. And to speed up matters, they're going to Fort Charlotte to build their own version of Jumbey Village."

In July, 1987 Jumbey Village cultural centre was torn down to make way for the proposed National Insurance Building.

Mr Moxey tells his story on a DVD -- soon to be released-- entitled "The Price of Being a Man -- the Quiet Revolution and the undoing of Jumbey Village".

<<< Edmund Moxey's tortured heart and soul over the New Jumbey Village planned for Fort Charlotte>>>

<<< The birth and death of Jumbey Village: ...the story of what might have been, and what in fact turned out to be Edmund Spencer Moxey's greatest triumph as well as his biggest disappointment... the creation of a place called Jumbey Village, and his struggle to secure the ideals that would have guaranteed the progress first envisioned as part of the quiet revolution>>>

<<< In all honesty, the idea of urban renewal cannot be claimed as being the brainchild of either the Christie or Ingraham administrations... It preceded both by many years... In fact, Urban Renewal in the broadest sense of the word was the brainchild of Sir Stafford Sands, the creator of this country's tourism and financial industries>>>

March 26, 2012

tribune242 editorial

Caribbean Blog International

Perry Christie’s remarks should scare Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC)

The danger of doing deals with governments
thenassauguardian editorial



Perry Christie’s remarks on Friday regarding the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) deal were strong. He told supporters at a conclave at the Hilton Outten Conference Center that if elected, the next Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government would redo the deal the Free National Movement (FNM) administration is negotiating with Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC).

“If the FNM administration proceeds against the advice of the PLP and sells to Cable and Wireless, we put Cable and Wireless on notice of our central position that the sale to Cable and Wireless is not in the national interest. And when we return to government, we will re-examine all of the provisions of the deal and we will aggressively renegotiate the terms of the agreement that we deem repugnant to the national interest,” said Christie.

This statement should scare CWC.

The last definitive barometer of public opinion in The Bahamas was the Elizabeth by-election in February 2010. The PLP won it by three votes. This would suggest that at that time—considering that Elizabeth is a swing seat—the electorate was still closely divided between the two major political parties.

The PLP feels justified threatening the CWC deal. After winning the May 2007 general election, the FNM administration cancelled contracts negotiated by the PLP when it was in government, including the straw market deal.

Governments have the responsibility to act in the best interest of the people they represent. If a new administration thinks a deal on the table is against the public interest, it should seek to change it or cancel it.

However, the government also has the legal responsibility to pay businesses what is owed due to breach of contract.

No national business can compete with the state when it comes to the power game.

The state has a department of lawyers, almost unlimited money through the Public Treasury and taxation and the capacity to make your life difficult, if not miserable.

In developing countries, these problems are magnified. Politicians in these countries often have less regard for the traditions and conventions of democracy, and more power is concentrated in their hands.

CWC is in a tough position. It is in the final stage of negotiating the acquisition of a major asset. At the same time, the opposition and alternative government has put it on notice that if it is elected, the deal it is about to sign with the current administration would not be honored.

This adds more uncertainty to the $210 million investment CWC is about to make.

If the PLP comes to office and breaks the deal, CWC could sue. Bahamian courts consistently demonstrate they are independent. The Supreme Court recently ruled against the government in the Blue Hill Road and Market Street road reversal dispute.

But such a battle would be long and expensive. It could also take the focus of CWC away from getting to know its new business and customers.

CWC is in a peculiar position. The unions representing the company’s soon-to-be workers dislike it. And now the opposition is threatening CWC with new terms.

CWC is an old organization with significant experience in the region. We wonder if its board is getting concerned about The Bahamas situation.

2/1/2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Bahamas Blog International

Environment Minister Earl Deveaux did not admit guilt by resignation

Deveaux did not admit guilt by resignation
tribune242 editorial



THE LATEST scuttlebut making the rounds of the political rumour mill is that by offering his resignation to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, Environment Minister Earl Deveaux admitted he was wrong to accept the invitation of Prince Karim Aga Khan to fly in his helicopter to the prince's private island in the Exumas. According to rumour mongers it is an admission by the Minister that the helicopter ride compromised his ability to make an objective decision on the Prince's application for permission to develop his island in the Exuma Land and Sea Park.

Those persons spreading the rumour are either completely ignorant of the Westminster system of parliamentary government, or they are maliciously exploiting the ignorance of the Bahamian people.

There are many reasons why ministers resign from Cabinet. We had an incident as recently as March when Branville McCartney resigned as Minister of State for Immigration. Mr McCartney said at the time that in the forefront of all his issues and emotions was his "feelings of stagnation and the inability to fully utilise" his "political potential at this time."

"We are facing tough times," he said, "but I confidently believe that the nation has been mobilized by Mr Ingraham and the FNM and rallied for a great national effort. I have learned why this Prime Minister and Leader of the FNM is the most successful leader of our party. And it is because of this that I say, I have no sympathy with and will give no credence or comfort to those who would want to use this resignation to undermine his leadership of the FNM and/or The Commonwealth of The Bahamas."

That was one reason for a resignation.

One must remember that when a member is elected to parliament, he is elected by the people. However, when he is made a Cabinet minister it is a position given by the prime minister -- a position that can be taken away at will for a number of reasons. Should anything arise in that ministry that could embarrass the prime minister or his government, then it is the action of a gentleman to go back to the prime minister and offer to resign. It is then up to the prime minister to accept or reject the offer.

In offering his resignation, Mr Deveaux did not admit that he had sold his integrity for a helicopter ride, he just did what was expected of him in the ancient tradition of the Westminster system. Unfortunately there are not many gentlemen left among us today.

This was the same tradition followed by the late Sir Kendal Isaacs when he relinquished the leadership of the FNM after he had led the party to defeat in the 1987 election. However, Opposition leader Perry Christie did not step down as party leader when he lost the government in 2007 to the FNM. He was not duty bound to do so and he chose not to follow tradition.

In the case of Mr Deveaux, Prime Minister Ingraham could hardly punish him for a practice that has been widely used over the years in all administrations when an investor wanted a minister to inspect a project for which he needed permission. It was customary for the investor to provide the transport, which is what the Aga Khan did in the case of Mr Deveaux.

And the Prime Minister certainly could not frown on Mr Deveaux after this practice had been turned into widespread abuse under the PLP government with investors -- with issues before cabinet and various government departments -- even making their aircraft available to fly PLP candidates around the islands during the 2007 election.

We know that the PLP are hungry for political bones to chew on, but it's time to drop this one -- it's going nowhere.

September 23, 2010

tribune242 editorial

Bahamas Blog International

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) should do a memory check

The PLP should do a memory check
tribune242 editorial


WELL FOR Pete's sake look whose talking!

In yesterday's Tribune the PLP criticised the "inept" FNM government for allowing crime to spiral out of control.

The PLP also condemned the FNM for failing to conduct a salary review for judges as is required by the Judges Remuneration and Pensions Act. Have they forgotten the furore created during their administration in 2006 when Justice John Lyons accused the PLP government of causing a constitutional crisis and showing a "manifest disregard for the rule of law" by failing to conduct a review of justices' salaries -- the very same Judges Remuneration and Pensions Act of which they now complain?

At the time of the Lyons' accusation the country could have afforded such a review of salaries. However, in today's economic climate, such a salary review for judges or anyone else in the civil service would put too great a strain on the Public Treasury.

In a controversial ruling in that year, Justice Lyons claimed that the PLP government had deliberately ignored a law designed to protect the constitutional independence of "that body of persons whose task is to protect all persons in the Bahamas against abuses of their constitutional right.

"If this was a deliberate act by the Cabinet (the Christie Cabinet) then -- and there is no dull edge to this -- this must be considered a deliberate attack on the independence of the judiciary. And that, in turn, is an attack on the fundamental constitutional right enjoyed by all persons in this country," said Justice Lyons.

Some angry words were exchanged with Justice Lyons accusing then Attorney General Allyson Maynard Gibson of using her "swift justice" system as a "self-promoting" piece of headline hunting and Mrs Gibson counter attacking from the security of the House of Assembly to pour equal scorn on the judge in denouncing his assertions as "misleading."

The Bahamas Bar Association agreed with the judge that if judges had to rely on the discretion of politicians for salary increases, the impartiality of their judgments could be compromised.

"You are losing half of your judiciary in 12 months," Justice Lyons said in a speech to a financial group. He talked of the backlog of cases, of the length of time accused persons on remand had to wait in prison for a court date, of one judge having to do the work of five -- all the same complaints now facing Attorney General John Delaney, who was appointed to his post on November 25, 2009.

At the time even Court of Appeal President Dame Joan Sawyer sided with Justice Lyons, admitting that she had had "personal experience of the executive trying to manipulate the judiciary."

"When you destroy the public's faith in the independence of the judiciary, to which court do you take your case?" she wanted to know.

And in the Senate, Senator Delaney, criticised then Attorney General Maynard Gibson for using the House to launch her attack on Justice Lyons' integrity.

"While the current crisis may have started with the government failing (twice) in its legal obligations under the Judges Remuneration and Pensions Act, the assailing of the character of a sitting judge is a separate and most egregious act by our Attorney General," said Senator Delaney.

Surely, the PLP who made the statement to the press yesterday are not so ignorant of their own history that they would make themselves look so foolish in pubic print. Or maybe their arrogance is such that they believe that Bahamians, like themselves, also have weak mental recall.

They also criticised the FNM government for allowing crime to spiral out of control, forgetting that crime has no nationality, nor has it any politics. Crime started to spiral out of control in the eighties when drugs took control of this country. And everyone knows under whose administration that occurred when Bahamians were made to believe that wealth, however obtained, was the sign of success, and it was nobody's business "whether I make it or I 'tief it!"

They also complain about not bringing offenders to justice and allowing persons who intimidate witnesses to continue to roam our streets -- the very criticism that we have of our judiciary's generosity with bail.

They talk of the serious criminal cases pending. This accumulation of a backlog didn't start under the FNM. We are particularly concerned about the murder of one of our staff during that administration, a case that could have been brought to a quick conclusion because of the number of eyewitnesses. However, the accused in this case is one of those walking the streets on bail.

As for our assessment of the Bahamian judiciary as a colossal failure, we make no apologies. Nor should anyone assume that this conclusion was aimed solely at our judges. Our lawyers are the largest part of this judicial body. The examination of conscience should start within "the honourable profession."

Attorney General Delaney knows the problems -- an accumulation of years of mismanagement. He has pinpointed the areas in need of reform and started the process. Not only should he be given time, but he should be given the resources and personnel to do the job.

September 07, 2010

tribune242 editorial

Bahamas Blog International

Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham: I would not have approved the Baha Mar development

PM: I would not have approved Baha Mar
By MEGAN REYNOLDS
Tribune Staff Reporter
mreynolds@tribunemedia.net:



PRIME Minister Hubert Ingraham announced he would not have approved the Baha Mar development under his administration as he hit back at allegations made by Opposition leader Perry Christie.

Speaking at a press conference called at the FNM headquarters in Mackey Street yesterday, Mr Ingraham denied holding any negotiations with developers of the $2.6 billion project agreed to under the PLP administration as he called for the PLP's full support in following it through.

"Had we been involved we would never have agreed to a deal like that for the Bahamas," Mr Ingraham said.

"We didn't cancel it, we didn't stop it, we didn't review it, we told Baha Mar when we came into office we don't like it, but if you are willing to live with what you signed with the PLP government we will accept it. They came forward with changes they wanted and we negotiated changes we wanted. Had we been involved we would never have agreed to a deal like that for the Bahamas."

Once funding from the China Export-Import Bank and employment of the China State Construction Company as general contractor has been approved by the Chinese government Mr Ingraham said major decisions on the employment of nearly 5,000 Chinese workers for the project will be taken to Parliament for a cross-party decision.

He said the work permits for 4,920 Chinese workers to develop the West Bay Street corridor and Baha Mar's commercial village would have to find agreement from the Opposition.

"The government of the Bahamas is committed to ensuring that foreign direct investment in our economy benefits Bahamians," said Mr Ingraham.

"It would be unconscionable for large numbers of foreign workers to be engaged in the Bahamas if large numbers of similarly skilled Bahamians are available to take up those jobs.

"Mr Christie, while certain to seek credit as the 'father' of the Baha Mar Project is already seeking to find shelter from becoming a part of a tough decision on the labour component for the construction of that project.

"I make abundantly clear that my government will not approve any extraordinary foreign labour component for the Baha Mar Project without the support of the Official Opposition.

"We are not going to born this PLP baby by ourselves.

"After all this is a baby conceived by them."

The high number of Chinese workers could translate to as many as two foreign workers for every Bahamian, which Mr Ingraham compared to Kerzner International's Atlantis worksite on Paradise Island where seven out of every ten labourers were Bahamian.

Mr Ingraham also took the opportunity to refute claims Baha Mar's negotiations were stalled under the FNM as he said it was the PLP that delayed progress by not following through with their obligations under the 2005 Heads of Agreement as government-owned lands in West Bay Street were not transferred to Baha Mar under the PLP as they should have been, and the Supplementary Heads of Agreement sought by the PLP government in May 2007 were not concluded before the FNM came to power.

And he said his government "cannot wait forever" for negotiations to conclude as protracted negotiations have stalled plans to divert Gladstone Road as Baha Mar interferes with the New Providence Road Improvement Project.

"Mr Christie has suggested that my government is seeking to keep secret, its negotiations with Baha Mar," Mr Ingraham said.

"No negotiations are taking place between the Bahamas Government and Baha Mar.

"Obviously we cannot be in a state of uncertainty forever so at some stage some decisions have to be made."

Baha Mar spokesman Robert Sands issued a statement following Mr Ingraham's press conference yesterday.

He said: "The size and scope of the Baha Mar project is unprecedented in the Bahamas.

"We are pleased with the consensus in the Bahamas on the desirability of the enormous economic, employment and social benefits it represents.

"We are making excellent progress, and we expect final approval from the Government of the People's Republic of China very shortly.

"Additionally we have already begun the process of bidding out the contraction work with the commercial village and the re-routing of West Bay Street which in itself will create hundreds of jobs for Bahamians.

"It is the first step in the project's creation of approximately 10,000 jobs for Bahamians over the next five years.

"We will continue to work closely with the Bahamian government and look forward to receiving the necessary approvals so we can begin work as quickly as possible."

Mr Ingraham agreed the Bahamas needs a major project and clarified the country currently only has the manpower and infrastructure to carry out one major project at a time, be it Baha Mar or Atlantis phase four.

"At the same time we can't have both; not simultaneously," he said.

June 14, 2010

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

Former Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell comments on Bahamas' UN human rights vote abstention

By BRENT DEAN ~ Guardian Senior Reporter ~ brentldean@nasguard.com:


The recent criticism of voting practices of The Bahamas by U.S. Ambassador Nicole Avant should show the government that countries have interests that are separate and aside from personal friendships and relationships, former Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell said yesterday.

"The FNM tried to make a meal out of the fact that the PLP had principled positions at the UN and in its foreign policy which was in the best interest of The Bahamas. But they took the opportunity when they were in opposition to score cheap political points, saying we were being anti-American," said Mitchell, the PLP MP for Fox Hill.

"So what is their explanation now? Are they being anti-American because they voted the way they did at the United Nations?"

In an Op-Ed published in The Nassau Guardian on Saturday, Ambassador Avant criticized The Bahamas for its decision to abstain from part of a vote at the United Nations on resolutions on the human rights situations in Iran, Burma and North Korea.

"It is our fervent hope that The Bahamas and others in the Caribbean region who abstained or voted against these resolutions will reconsider their positions. We cannot stand by and wait when people's lives are at stake and the principles that we all purport to share — respect for democracy, the rule of law and human rights — are in jeopardy," said Avant.

The votes on the resolutions condemning the human rights practices in the three countries were held on November 19 and 20, at the United Nations General Assembly's Third Committee.

The three resolutions passed.

The General Assembly allocates to the Third Committee a range of social, humanitarian affairs and human rights issues.

Mitchell said that as sovereign countries both The Bahamas and the U.S. have the right to their respective positions on the issue. He said historically The Bahamas and Caribbean countries have stayed away from resolutions specifically condemning countries, as was the case with the recent abstentions.

However, added Mitchell, the last PLP government moved away from this position, siding with the U.S. government on several resolutions at the request of former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

When asked about the issue last week, Foreign Affairs Minister Brent Symonette said, "We voted in favor of the resolution. We abstained from the second part of the resolution which requires affirmative action. The resolution this year, to the best of my knowledge, dropped or left out certain other countries which it included last year.

"When we abstained from that vote, we also submitted an explanation — which I think the U.S. ambassador or certainly the State Department would have been fully aware of — which explains our situation. We have been approached by the Canadians and the Americans with regard to our actions and I am in the process of drafting a response to them."

December 22, 2009

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Constitutional Review Commission Officials At Odds about Some of The New Recommendations of The Commission - and with what the Ingraham Administration had Proposed in The 2002 Referendum

Michael Barnett, Co-deputy Chairman of the Constitutional Review Commission defends the position of the FNM government on the failed 2002 referendum

2002 Referendum Defended

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

11 April 2006

 

 

  

 

Two officials of the government-appointed Constitutional Review Commission are at odds over whether some of the new recommendations of the Commission are largely in line with what the Ingraham Administration had proposed in the 2002 referendum.

Co-deputy Chairman Michael Barnett even defended the position of the FNM government on the failed referendum, noting that the proposed changes had been supported by the then opposition in parliament and then later opposed.

"There is no radical difference in the nature of the recommendations with respect to constitutional change," said Mr. Barnett, who was one of the guests on the Love 97 programme ‘Jones and Company’ on Sunday.

He suggested that besides some "tinkering, glossing and tightening up" the recommendations of the new report "are very much the same" as what the FNM government had pushed in the referendum.

Shortly after members of the commission presented a copy of their preliminary report to Prime Minister Perry Christie last month, former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, who is now again the leader of the FNM, noted essentially the same.

He also said that the PLP government appeared to now be suggesting that while the proposed changes were wrong under the FNM’s watch, they are now right under the PLP’s watch.

But Commission Co-chairman Paul Adderley, who was also on the Sunday programme, agreed that while Mr. Barnett was suggesting that the groundwork for what the commission is now doing was laid by the Ingraham Administration, that is not true.

He indicated that there are fundamental differences contained in the report of his commission, although he recognized that there are some similarities.

"Firstly, with regard to citizenship, no one objects to the concept of equality of women and the FNM proposal was that Bahamian women married to a foreigner [that their] children became Bahamians just like the children of Bahamian men," Mr. Adderley noted.

"That provision is exactly the same and I think everybody agrees with that."

But he pointed out that while the FNM government proposed that a foreign man who married a Bahamian woman could obtain citizenship immediately, the commission recommends that he be made to wait years before qualifying.

"That particular provision, I think, caused them more difficulty in the referendum than any other, that instantaneous citizenship," Mr. Adderley said.  "This commission proposed between five to 10 years…That is the fundamental difference…That, I think, is very, very significant."

The commission co-chairman also pointed out that the FNM government proposed that the boundaries commission still be subjected to the prime minister’s power to amend.

But the Constitutional Commission is recommending that the constitution be amended to create a truly independent electoral and boundaries commission and remove the power of the prime minister to modify the report of the commission.

Mr. Barnett then insisted again that the concepts and the ideas of the 2002 proposal and the present one are the same.

"With respect to the marriage, what was proposed during the 2002 referendum exercise, I thought, is the concept that the right that was afforded to non-Bahamian women who were married to Bahamian men…that same right should be given to a non-Bahamian male who is married to a non-Bahamian female…That very same concept is repeated in the recommendations that have been made by this report," he said, repeating Mr. Adderley’s earlier point.

Mr. Adderley, meanwhile, said there are also significant differences as they relate to the 2002 proposal on the mandatory retirement age of judges.

"The point where we disagree is with regard to the term of judges," he said.

The Ingraham Administration recommended that the retirement age of a Supreme Court judge be extended from 67 to 72; and the retirement age of a justice of the Court of Appeal be extended to 75, with the right to extend being held by the prime minister.

"Mr. Adderley said, "We have number one suggested so far that the retirement age be 70 – fixed and no question of extending it by the prime minister because we thought that would give the prime minister a little too much leverage and power."

Mr. Barnett said he still thinks that the retirement age being recommended by the commission is "too low", but he said he agreed with the concept that the prime minister should not have the power to extend the retirement age.

On the point of the 2002 referendum defeat, Mr. Barnett pointed out that the PLP while in opposition had supported the Ingraham Administration’s proposal.

"You must not forget that the proposals that had been put forward had received the unanimous support of all the members of parliament and that the people could have been educated as to why those…proposals had been made and why it was that they supported them," he said.

"[The opposition] elected not to do so and as a result of that I think we got caught up in the politics of early 2002 - and what were really sensible proposals were simply rejected…not because of the defects of the proposals or the lack of merit of the proposals because you can see many of the proposals are repeated here."

Mr. Adderley quickly said, "But don’t underestimate the people’s capacity once they are told something to think for themselves."

The commission intends to carry out another round of consultations with the Bahamian people before submitting final recommendations.

Responding to a question that was asked by the show’s host, Wendall Jones, Mr. Adderley said, "[The government doesn’t] have to accept a single word which we put down here, but a government would be a very foolish government not to accept anything we put down."

The commission makes many key provisional recommendations in its report – copies of which are available at the commission’s office in the Royal Victoria Gardens.

A few of the recommendations include abolishing the office of governor general and creating a democratic parliamentary republic with the head of state being the president; increasing the size of the senate to 23 and giving the president the power to appoint five of those senators; and eliminating gender bias from the constitution.

Prime Minister Christie has foreshadowed that a referendum will be held so Bahamians can decide on what changes would actually be made to the constitution.

Bahamian Labour Leaders At Odds Over the International Labour Organization - ILO Convention 87

The pros and cons of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 87

Labour Leaders At Odds Over Freedom Of Association

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

21/06/2004

 

 

Two leaders of the country's trade union umbrella organizations have different views on whether proposed legislation should soon be brought to parliament to enact the much talked about ILO Convention 87.

This would allow workers to join the union of their choice, as opposed to the union of their craft.

Trade Union Congress President Obie Ferguson continues to press the government to pass the necessary laws to give employees the right to choose.

But National Congress of Trade Unions President Pat Bain believes now is not the time to take such a step because he said all parties concerned have not yet been properly educated on the Convention.

Minister of Labour Vincent Peet announced recently that officials at the Attorney General's office are drafting amendments to the relevant pieces of legislation to enact the Convention.

Former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham sees this as an unwise move.

 

While making his budget communication last Thursday night, Mr. Ingraham said he was concerned by the inappropriate policy announcements of the Progressive Liberal Party Government.

Although the Convention was ratified under his administration, Mr. Ingraham said, "Now, when we seek to make ourselves even more attractive to good direct foreign investment, is not the time to talk about ILO 87."

He added, "I trust that this is more bark than bite and that the PLP government recognizes that legislating this Convention at this time could have a negative impact upon the investment climate and business environment."

Mr. Ferguson told the Journal Friday that he found these comments "surprising."

"It was the FNM government that put forward the ILO 87 resolution and had it ratified and registered - so I don't understand that, but no progressive country would want to think along those lines," he said.  "It is inextricably connected to the World Trade Organization."

Mr. Ferguson added, "Investors can't turn away because WTO is driven by foreign investment.  It is a multinational trading regime and that is one of their conditions."

He said he believes that freedom of association would force unions to be more efficient.

"If they're not happy with my leadership, the members have a choice, just like with the FNM and PLP," Mr. Ferguson said.  "People must have choices all over the world."

He said the right to choose is fundamental and he doubts that the government would work against that.

Mr. Ferguson also said that he wrote to Minister of Labour Vincent Peet requesting a copy of the draft amendments.  But Minister Peet said Sunday that he was still awaiting the proposed amendments from the AG's office.

Mr. Ferguson added that ILO 87 "would support democracy."

Mr. Bain, said, meanwhile, that the Convention is very confusing and education is key before any laws are passed to legislate it.

He said that is precisely why the NCTU is planning a seminar on July 24 with regional trade union experts to discuss the pros and cons of the Convention.

"While I am right now ambivalent about it, I say let's have the education process going through before we make the legislative changes," Mr. Bain told the Journal Sunday.

He noted the challenges that would be involved in negotiating industrial contracts for members of a particular union who may belong to many different professions.

"It's confusing in that for 30 years or more we were operating on the basis of craft unions," Mr. Ferguson said.  "Let's proceed with caution…Let's ensure there are discussions first."

While he is against legislating the Convention at this time, Mr. Bain disagreed with Mr. Ingraham that it could have a negative impact on the investment climate.

"Unionisation is always being used as a means against foreign investment," said the NCTU president, who added that it is not.

Deficit Spending Plagues Successive Governments of The Bahamas

$164 Million Deficit Projected in The Bahamas National Budget 2004-2005

$164 Million Deficit Projected

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

candiadames@hotmail.com

Journal Staff Writer

05/27/04

The 2004-2005 budget projects a budget deficit of $164 million, a notable increase from the $122 million projected last year.

The $164 million deficit would be 2.9 percent of GDP.  The $122 million that was forecast last year would have been 2.2 percent of GDP.

Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Perry Christie, who made his budget communication in the House of Assembly Wednesday, said the deficit of 2.9 percent is about the same as the projected outturn for 2003/2004.

“This level of deficit is reasonable in view of the fact that the economy is on the threshold of expanding,” Mr. Christie said, “and, therefore, it would not make sense to deflate the economy at this time.

The prime minister said the government is still targeting a lower deficit than that realized in the years 2001/2002 and 2002/2003.

Mr. Christie noted that in 2001/2002, under the previous administration, the deficit reached 4.1 percent and in 2002/2003, the deficit reached 3.5 percent.  He pointed out that that was also in large part due to the fiscal policy of the previous administration, which had prepared much of the budget before the May 2, 2002 general election.

He said the projected deficit is “clearly an improvement over the previous years, demonstrating this government’s commitment to economic and fiscal prudence.”

The prime minister also reported that the continuing weakness of the global economy resulted in revenue targets not being attainable.

The 2003/2004 budget envisaged the introduction of a Flight Information Region, meaning that the government intended to take full control of the country’s airspace from the Americans.

As a result, the Bahamas air traffic control system would have been able to collect significant fees of between $40 million and $50 million to go mainly toward airport upgrades.

“The US authorities, who presently manage our airspace, had no objection in principle to the proposal, but were concerned with implications for Homeland Security,” Mr. Christie said.

Following constructive discussions with those authorities, it was agreed that instead of implementing the FIR, the US would continue to manage the airspace on security grounds, he said.

Mr. Christie added that the fees collected will be provided to Bahamian authorities and in this way the government’s intensions will be realized.

“The fact that the project did not proceed in 2003/2004 because of the external complications to which I have referred inevitably reduced revenue.

The government also expected to collect revenue from the sale of 49 percent of the shares in the Bahamas Telecommunications Company, but that too did not materialize during the fiscal year.

“The recent termination of the privatisation process does not mean that my government has abandoned the privatisation of BTC,” he assured.  “On the contrary, the privatisation of BTC remains an important item of my government’s economic agenda.

“Accordingly, the privatisation will be re-launched as soon as circumstances reasonably allow and on a basis, moreover, that will take adequate account of the lessons that were learned in the earlier process.”

The Governing Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) in The Bahamas Defends Against, 'a do-nothing government' Perception

This Ruling PLP Government really is a Do-nothing Government, says Tommy Turnquest, Leader of the Official Opposition, Free National Movement (FNM) Party 

PLP On The Defensive

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

21/04/2004

Fearing that its record as a government has become distorted, the Progressive Liberal Party has launched a comprehensive public relations initiative to correct what it feels could be a damaging perception.

"I believe that once people look at the facts and once people have the benefit of having access to the facts and they review those facts with an objective mind, they will come to the conclusion that this is perhaps the fastest starting government in the history of The Bahamas," said Raynard Rigby, the party's national chairman.

That was a claim Free National Movement leader Senator Tommy Turnquest would probably find laughable.

"This really is a do-nothing government," Mr. Turnquest declared Tuesday, while speaking with the Bahama Journal.

The PLP will take a ministry-by-ministry approach to the advertising campaign, Mr. Rigby said.

"I think the way you judge [whether we are the fastest starting government] is by looking at the first 23 months of this PLP government and by looking at the first 23 months of the FNM government.

“If you do that comparative analysis, we believe that the evidence is overwhelming, is compelling that this PLP government is much further ahead after 23 months in government, than the FNM was," he said.

Mr. Rigby said that the government is not facing a PR crisis as it carries out a "very responsible" campaign.  Once again he asserted that all is well with the governing PLP.

But Mr. Turnquest thinks otherwise.

He said the PLP "is obviously running, trying to counteract the prevailing feeling in this country, but they need to do it with factual information."

"I think the Bahamian people have been disappointed with their performance," he added.

Already, the PLP has started running radio ads informing listeners that it has constructed more than 500 houses since it came to office on May 2, 2002.  The ad says this compares to the more than 700 houses it claims the FNM constructed in 10 years.

"If [Housing Minister Shane Gibson] continues, in our first term, it is likely we would have built by far more houses than the FNM built in 10 years," Mr. Rigby said.

"If the minister can build all of those houses, it tells us he must be doing something.  He's not sitting at his desk twiddling his thumbs.  He's working for the Bahamian people."

But Mr. Turnquest found it "curious" that the government has chosen to start the campaign by focusing on its successes in housing.

"We intend to answer them in great detail," he said, revealing that his party plans to hold a rally at the R.M. Bailey Park on May 3.  It is the same night the prime minister has set aside for his second forum with the media to answer questions on national television.

Mr. Turnquest believes the government has a long way to go to change the negative perception held by some Bahamians.

"It is very clear to me and to thousands of Bahamians that the government is losing support and that people are becoming increasingly disenchanted with the PLP government," he said.  "They are not satisfied that sufficient attention and focus is being paid to governance.

"The PLP is now trying to counteract these claims by putting on advertisements and while that is good for radio stations and newspapers...that doesn't explain away their inactivity in terms of what they are doing."

Only two days ago, Prime Minister Perry Christie made a move of his own to set the record straight.

While speaking at the opening of the Golden Sun Development, a new housing project near Golden Gates, he dismissed what he called "little silly distractions" being put forth by "silly people."

Mr. Turnquest said he was disappointed by that comment.

"He must not use intemperate language when talking about Bahamians," Mr. Turnquest said."  Bahamians have a right to criticize particularly when his government is doing nothing."

Edison Key Says That He Would Not Rescind His Letter of Resignation from The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)

There is no way in the world that I can go back on my decision of my resignation from the Progressive Liberal Party - PLP; and therefore it is final, says Edison Key 

Edison Key: "It is finished."

Key Shakes Up PLP

By Candia Dames

candiadames@hotmail.com

Nassau, The Bahamas

20/02/2004

Former Progressive Liberal Party Senator Edison Key revealed to the Bahama Journal last night that two government ministers asked him to rescind his letter of resignation, but he said there is no way on earth that will ever happen.

Mr. Key also said that he hopes that his resignation sent a strong message to the party that it needed to get its act together.

"I hope it will be a wake up call for the leadership in the party," he said.  "And I hope that it will only cause the support out there to grow stronger and [create] unity within the rank and file of the party."

He said he met with Works and Utilities Minister Bradley Roberts, Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell and the Member of Parliament for Cat Island, Rum Cay and San Salvador Philip "Brave" Davis, Wednesday night who asked him to think twice about the decision he had made.

Mr. Key said these men are people whom he respects highly, but he said after a "frank talk we came to the final conclusion that my decision is final."

"Progressive Liberal Party and, therefore, we agreed that I need to submit an official resignation to the president of the Senate, which I will do very shortly and it will be official," he said. "In the meantime, I guess you could call me Senator."

 

Mr. Key spoke to the Journal about a meeting he had with Prime Minister Perry Christie in Nassau Thursday morning at which time he said he personally delivered a copy of his letter of resignation, which he was considering making public to the media.  He said he presented the letter in front of three Cabinet Ministers.

Mr. Key added he was "a little bit angry" that the prime minister did not get the original letter more than a month ago.

Mr. Key also said his letter outlined the manner in which he was treated since becoming a Senator under the re-incarnated PLP government.

He said he made it clear to Mr. Christie that he respected the office of Prime Minister, even though he criticized the country's leader earlier this week for lack of direction and poor leadership.

"The office of Prime Minister to me is an office that I respect next to the office of God," Mr. Key said.  "I am a Bahamian citizen.  I have nowhere to go and if we can't respect the person who holds the office, that's one thing, but the office of Prime Minister should be there to protect every single Bahamian for justice and right.

"I hope that prime ministers now and in the future will recognize the important role that they have to play as the leader of our country."

He said his meeting with the prime minister went "very well."

But he said, "I told him how I had tremendous hopes during the campaign and up until a few months after the election.  I told him how disappointed and hurt I am about the way I have been treated.  I told him this thing goes deep to my soul and there is no way in the world that I can go back on my decision of my resignation and therefore it is final.

"It is finished."

Mr. Key said he and the prime minister "parted on a very good note."

When asked if he thought his resignation hurt the party, he said, "I certainly hope not."

"I never had any intension to hurt the party.  That is not my intension.  I hope that it will only make them stronger and bring the people together in one accord and not divide it like it is today because it looks like we are becoming further and further apart."

Mr. Key added, "The decision I made was for Edison Key.  Other people will decide what they want to do."

"I've given 30-something years to this party and I'm still very much alive," he said.

Mr. Key added that he did not feel that he needed to attend a PLP council meeting held Thursday night because he didn't think Members of Parliament and party officers would speak freely if he were present.