Money in Bahamian politics: ...There is no campaign finance legislation in The Bahamas ...and we submit that the time has come to consider changing this...

Financing political campaigns

Consider this

By Philip C. Galanis

Elections are more often bought than won.

– U.S. Rep. Lee Hamilton

 

As the general election in The Bahamas approaches, there has been considerable discussion about the sources of political campaign finance.  One of the local tabloids has suggested that the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) is being funded by “unsavory characters”.  At one of the Free National Movement  (FNM) rallies, the prime minister is quoted as saying: “The PLP has plenty money!  And there is a reason they have plenty money.  The money they’ve got, we don’t want!  We’d rather be out than in if we have to use that kind of money!  Our hands are clean!”

Therefore this week, we would like to Consider This... should we be concerned where political parties receive their campaign contributions?

Campaign finance refers to funds that are raised and spent to promote candidates and political parties in election contests.  In modern democracies, such funds are not necessarily devoted exclusively to election campaigns. Political contributions are also used to finance issue campaigns in referenda, party activities and party organizations.

For the most part, however, in The Bahamas, political campaign finance is used to establish campaign headquarters at the constituency and national levels, to purchase party paraphernalia, including signage, pins, and flyers, to pay political consultants for polling and focus group activities, party manifestos, newspaper, radio and television commercials, constituency activities, travel to the Family Islands and for political rallies and concerts.

And, yes, political campaign finance is also used to purchase votes.  Although this is illegal, vote buying has been a feature of our political culture long before the establishment of the first political party in 1953.

Reasons for giving

There are many reasons why persons contribute to political campaigns.  The first and most obvious reason is that donors support the political positions, programs or personalities of one party over another and want to see that candidate and party win in order to implement those policies and programs.  In many cases, the donor’s intentions are noble and sincere and contribute to the strengthening of the democratic process.

Another reason for making a political contribution to a particular candidate or a party is to ingratiate oneself to both, in case the candidate or his party wins the election.  The donor then hopes to be able to obtain support for his personal, business or civic programs.

There is also wide public perception that some donors expect government favors in return, such as specific legislation being enacted or defeated, the awarding of significant government contracts or other benefits granted as a result of large campaign contributions; so some have come to equate campaign finance with political corruption and bribery.

Financial contributors

So then, does it really matter who finances political campaigns in The Bahamas?  The short answer is yes.  If political parties expect to be taken seriously, significant contributors must be closely scrutinized in order to determine whether the acceptance of their contributions will adversely affect the voters’ perceptions.  Let’s look at several examples.

Much has been made about lawyers who defend clients who are accused of criminal offenses.  The suggestion is that if a candidate is to be taken seriously by the voter, he should not represent persons so accused.  There is an even more pernicious suggestion that lawyers who do so are undesirable candidates for Parliament.  We totally disagree.

We are a country that is governed by the rule of law, whose primary precept is that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.  Therefore, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a candidate representing such persons, even in cases where the accused are awaiting an extradition hearing. Let us remember that there was no similar public outcry when Eugene Dupuch and Sir Orville Turnquest successfully represented Robert Vesco, the internationally renowned financial fugitive, when the United States sought his extradition.  In fact, Sir Orville subsequently enjoyed an illustrious and distinguished career as a Cabinet minister and deputy prime minister and then ultimately as governor general of The Commonwealth of The Bahamas.

Even more has been made of candidates accepting donations from such individuals.  Keeping in mind the innocent until proven guilty concept, we see nothing untoward about taking donations from such accused individuals, nor do we see anything inappropriate about accepting donations from individuals who have been acquitted of the charges against them.  They were presumed innocent and proven to be innocent, therefore donations from such persons are just like those from people who have never had a brush with the law.  Of course, if the contributor was actually convicted of an offense, then it would be imprudent for such contributions to be accepted.  Far too often in this society we do not appreciate the difference.

A second example involves a completely legitimate, clinically-clean contributor who makes a substantial contribution with the clear understanding that, if elected, the winner would ensure that certain actions are taken or favors granted for the contributor’s benefit.  Notwithstanding that contributor being above reproach, such an arrangement is equivalent to bribery and corruption.

Accordingly, the real test of the appropriateness of the contribution must be the legal standing as well as the intention of the contributor and an understanding of the motivation of such contributions.

Campaign finance laws

Most countries that rely on private donations to fund campaigns require extensive disclosure, including the name, employer and address of donors.  This is intended to police undue donor influence, while preserving most of the benefits of private financing, including the right to make donations and to spend money to enhance political free speech, saving government the expense of funding campaigns and keeping government from funding partisan free speech, which some citizens would find odious.

Supporters of private financing systems believe that private financing fosters civic involvement, ensures that a diversity of views are heard, and prevents government from tilting the scales to favor those in power or with political influence.  They also encourage enhanced transparency in the funding of candidates and the political parties.

There is no campaign finance legislation in The Bahamas and we submit that the time has come to consider changing this.  We believe that the correct balance of political finance impacts a country’s ability to effectively maintain free and fair elections, effective governance, democratic government and the regulation of corruption.

Conclusion

Political campaign finance can affect various societal institutions.  We fully recognize that money is necessary for democratic politics, and that candidates and political parties must have access to funds to play their part in the political process.  Money is never an unproblematic part of the political system, and, therefore, regulation of this process is highly desirable.

We also believe that our political culture must be taken into account when devising strategies for controlling money in politics in Bahamian elections.  Ultimately, the effective regulation and disclosure of political campaign finance can help to control the adverse effects of the role of money in politics, but only if well-conceived and implemented.  Without those proper regulations, our democratic process is in danger, and the pirates might just have to be expelled once more.

 

•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

Mar 05, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

There are no campaign finance laws in The Bahamas, so Bahamian political parties do not have to disclose who finances their operations

Cables reveal discussions of money in elections




By BRENT DEAN
NG Deputy News Editor
thenassauguardian
brentldean@nasguard.com



A senior member of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) disclosed that his party spent around $7 million on the 2002 general election campaign, and a senior member of the Free National Movement (FNM) revealed that his party would need to spend between $150,000 and $250,000 on a potential by-election in the then Holy Cross constituency, according to diplomatic cables obtained by The Nassau Guardian through WikiLeaks.

There are no campaign finance laws in The Bahamas and the two main political parties do not disclose who finances their operations.

According to a 2003 confidential cable by the United States Embassy in Nassau, former PLP MP and businessman Frankie Wilson told embassy officials that the PLP spent approximately $7 million on the 2002 campaign. In a note in the cable, the embassy said the FNM claims to have spent about $4 million on that campaign.

The embassy did not cite its source for the FNM figure. However, the embassy did note that, “neither (party) is required to provide any accounting for campaign contributions or expenditures, so both figures are suspect.”

The U.S. said that though Wilson disclosed the figure during the meeting in May 2003, “he did not elaborate on where all this money came from.”

Because money donated in The Bahamas to political parties is donated with the understanding that the donors’ identities will not be publicly disclosed, political parties are under an ‘unofficial obligation’ to keep the sources of party financing secret.

The PLP has historically lingered behind the FNM when it comes to party financing. The party has admitted this publicly.

The FNM was formed from an amalgamation of disaffected PLPs in the late 1960s and early 1970s and the remnants of the old United Bahamian Party, including many of the old white merchant elite. The consistency of support from the old white merchant class has provided the FNM a base of financial stability the PLP has not really had.

Coming out of the 2002 general election when the PLP won 29 seats and the FNM won 7 seats – four independents were elected – the PLP was confident that it would win the next general election.

“Wilson confidently predicted the PLP would win the election again in 2007, and dismissed the FNM as disorganized and poorly led,” he said of the FNM under the leadership of then Senator Tommy Turnquest according to the cable.

“He also said that for the first time in 2002, the PLP was competitive in terms of campaign financing.”

The potential Holy Cross by-election

In a confidential May 2004 cable, Turnquest talked party financing during a meeting with U.S. officials.

This meeting took place in the wake of the bankruptcy order issued by then Supreme Court Justice Jeanne Thompson in March 2004 against the then PLP MP for Holy Cross, Sidney Stubbs.

Bankrupt individuals are not eligible to sit in Parliament. If the court order had stood, Stubbs would have had to vacate the seat and a by-election would have been called.

“Turnquest estimated that the FNM would spend between $150,000 – $250,000 on the election, should it take place,” according to the cable.

The Americans said they asked Turnquest how he could possibly spend that much money on so few voters and, according to the cable, he replied that Bahamians like free paraphernalia.

If the $150,000 to $250,000 figure is multiplied out through 40 constituencies – the number of constituencies in the 2002 general election – the FNM would spend between $6 million and $10 million on a campaign.

Turnquest offered further insight into the thinking of the FNM around the potential by-election. The cable depicts a FNM leader who was not confident that his party could win the seat against the sitting government.

“Turnquest indicated that he has no plans to run for this seat, but fully supports ‘his close friend’, Carl Bethel, to represent the FNM. Turnquest estimated the FNM's chances of winning the seat at 50/50,” according to the embassy in the cable.

“Claiming that the sitting government had tremendous resources – public works projects and jobs – to bring to bear in the campaign, Turnquest sniped that were the PLP government not so weak its odds of retaining the seat would be 70 to 30.”

The cable also revealed that Turnquest thought that such a by-election would have been a war.

“The election, predicted Turnquest, would be costly for both parties as each would pour resources into it, his FNM to embarrass the government, the PLP to avoid an embarrassing defeat,” the embassy said in the cable.

“Each of the voters in the constituency would be personally contacted and both parties would hold almost nightly (and expensive) rallies. As many as 40 to 80 campaign workers would be brought in by each party for the campaign.”

A politically savvy Turnquest, however, realized that it should not be assumed that a by-election would happen.

“Turnquest expressed some doubt that the election would even be called, pointing out that Stubbs could avoid resignation if his attorneys succeed in overturning the court's bankruptcy finding,” according to the cable.

Turnquest assumed correctly. In May 2005, Her Majesty’s Privy Council ruled that the Court of Appeal erred when it determined that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal of Stubbs against his bankruptcy order issued by the Supreme Court.

The order of bankruptcy was set aside allowing Stubbs to take his seat in Parliament.

Turnquest also discussed with the Americans the potential of a by-election in the PLP stronghold of St. Cecilia, which was and still is held by Cynthia Pratt, according to the cable.

Pratt stepped down as PLP deputy leader in 2009, but there was speculation long before she made the move that she would leave front-line politics. In 2004, Turnquest understood that St. Cecilia was a lost cause for the FNM.

“Turnquest hinted that the odds of FNM victory in the PLP stronghold of St. Cecilia were so slim that his party might not even contest the election,” said the embassy if such a by-election were to take place.

The Americans attempted to decipher what the issues of relevance would be in a potential Holy Cross by-election.

“Asked about the issues likely to dominate the campaign, Turnquest acknowledged that the FNM had hired a marketing company to conduct polls during the general election – although the results were closely held within the party leadership – and that he had lately been commissioning focus groups to probe public opinion,” according to the cable.

“Turnquest said that he had personally attended quite a few of these focus groups.”

Looking at the Bahamian election process in 2004, the Americans remarked in the cable, “As expensive as Bahamian elections have become, they remain relatively unsophisticated.”

They said that Turnquest's belief that he can sit in on focus groups probing his character and image without biasing the results reflects the relative naivety with which Bahamian politicians in general approach survey research.

5/24/2011

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International