What’s left for us?
By Philip C. Galanis
There has been considerable discussion lately about the changes that are taking place all around us in today's Bahamas. With the dismantling of public entities such as the Hotel Corporation, the privatization of BaTelCo, the massive capital public works projects that are largely being supervised and staffed by foreign companies and foreign workers, and now the relaxation of the Bahamas Investment Policy, this week we would like to Consider This... When the history of The Bahamas is written about this era, will the prime minister and his sidekick minister of state for finance be described as progressive and enlightened agents of change for a modern Bahamas, or will they be perceived as myopic enemies of the people who presided over the public auction of The Bahamas, having allowed too many foreigners to rapaciously highjack our patrimony, leaving us all asking, “What’s left for us?”
This consideration and a public discourse becomes more urgently relevant in a globalized world, where too often our political leaders seem overly eager to use globalization as an excuse for their shortcomings on our behalf, instead of boldly mounting a well thought out approach as to how we should embrace this rapidly-developing and ever-changing phenomenon for the betterment of our citizens.
The prime minister recently announced in Parliament that his government has changed the policy with respect to foreigners investing in areas that have traditionally been reserved for Bahamians, with specific reference to non-ethnic restaurants and entertainment businesses. He suggested that this will provide greater inward or foreign direct investment into the country's economy, and it therefore follows that this is a good thing. In the wake of this announcement, let's consider this... while the rapid advancement of globalization will of necessity require us to rethink long-established ways of how we conduct our affairs, are there not certain fundamental principles that we must maintain? Are there not certain foundational norms that should be unassailable, non-negotiable and immutable — simply off the table — with anyone at anytime? Like many Bahamians, I believe there are. And irrespective of whichever government has the gall to tamper with such indisputable fundamental principles, we should demand of them that they consider what kind of long-term effects their decisions will have on The Bahamas for many generations to come.
One such fundamental principle is Bahamian citizenship. Given the recent decisions taken by this government, are we going to arrive at a place where, in the interest of wishing to be seen as "enlightened adherents and advocates of globalization" or perhaps the more crass and accurate justification of financial expediency, we are going to begin to sell Bahamian citizenship to all and sundry? It is not that farfetched. We have or are in the process of selling every other aspect of our patrimony. We have done it with the public corporations. We have done it with the major capital projects. We are now doing it with certain aspects of our Judiciary. Daily we continue to allow foreigners in the workplace as a matter of course to consistently abuse and frustrate our citizens with impunity? So what is there to give us any confidence that the sale of Bahamian citizenship is not a distant possibility? The difficulty with beginning down this road is the uncertainty of where it will end and just how far we will go for the sake of someone’s idea of how to advance our country.
So now the Government has decided that foreigners can invest in and own any restaurant or entertainment business. How can the Government justify such a decision? There are several pernicious developments that will result from such a decision.
First, this decision will invite and encourage foreigners to compete in The Bahamas in those areas that have long been reserved for Bahamians. And make no mistake — those foreigners who will come here to open restaurants and entertainment businesses will have very deep pockets indeed. This kind of competition can very realistically force competing Bahamians out of business because of the kind of capital or financial firepower those foreign competitors would bring to the local marketplace. Do not be mislead, either, that they will contribute greatly to our wholesale grocery businesses. Realistically, entrepreneurs with this kind of financial investment will be much more apt to bring in trailer-loads of food and other supplies, bought more cheaply from our neighbor to the west than they could ever purchase it here.
Secondly, persons who are employed by those businesses that will be marginalized by such competition will be forced to seek employment elsewhere. And they should not rely on being able to simply apply for jobs at these new, foreign owned ventures. These businesses, much like the foreign-owned hotels that we are so used to, will insist upon a much higher level of training and experience. Who knows? This may even be the beginning of a "renaissance of foreign workers" in the restaurant and entertainment business, just as we saw decades ago.
Thirdly, foreign investors will want to repatriate their profits, and that is completely understandable. But consider the drain of foreign reserves that will ensue because of the profits that would leave the country, as well as the money spent on provisions imported by these businesses. Those closely-coveted profits that are earned from Bahamians and non-Bahamians alike on Bahamian soil will quickly be transferred out of the country, for the benefit of those investors elsewhere.
Finally, this ill-conceived policy shift will make it more difficult for future generations of Bahamians to enter the marketplace in these sectors. Bahamians already encounter many barriers to entry into the local economy, most notably adequate funding for their projects. Which bank here, Bahamian or foreign-owned, will be inclined to lend to prospective local entrepreneurs when, as a result of this ill-conceived policy, they will likely adopt the posture that there are already too many "foreign-owned" businesses chasing a finite number of patrons?
If the government felt such an urgent need to alter the existing policy, would it not have made more sense to first ensure that there would be greater participation by Bahamians in these sectors? The government, instead of giving away the entire shop, lock stock and barrel, could have tweaked the policy to allow foreigners to participate in these sectors, if they agreed to partner with Bahamians, with specific, clearly-defined investment parameters to ensure that such partnerships are meaningful. This would have expanded the possibilities for our own citizens.
What is next? Will the government, the repository of all knowledge and wisdom, next invite foreign doctors, lawyers, accountants, engineers, architects and the like to set up businesses here justified with the same twisted reasoning and logic proffered for this decision? Let's take it further. In virtually every major capital that I have visited over the years, I have used foreign cab drivers who shuttle me between the airport, the hotel or whatever destination that I might require. Is that what the government has in store for the future of our country? To allow foreign taxi drivers to enter into competition in an area that has long been reserved for Bahamians? I believe you get the point, although I doubt that they do.
For those who would suggest that we should not become xenophobic, I submit that there will be no need for xenophobia if our leaders would demonstrate the courage to ensure that, despite the rapid onslaught of globalization and their dogged determination to give away the store, and notwithstanding their lack of confidence in Bahamians, one of their immutable, non-negotiable and indisputable first principles should be that today, tomorrow and forever, The Bahamas is and must be first and foremost for Bahamians. It seems sad, but true, that somewhere along the way, they have forgotten this.
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.
5/2/2011
The Nassauguardian
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label foreign workers Bahamas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label foreign workers Bahamas. Show all posts
Monday, May 9, 2011
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Chinese loans are cheap... and The Bahamas is borrowing... What's the catch?
The limitations of the Chinese love affair
thenassauguardian editorial
The Bahamas has fallen fully into the embrace of China. And the rising empire has been kind with its “gifts.”
The $2.6 billion Baha Mar project and the $70 million airport highway are being financed by China. Last week, the government announced that the China Harbour Engineering Company Ltd. will build the North Abaco Port and by-pass road; a bridge between Little and Great Abaco; a port and by-pass highway in Exuma; and the Eleuthera Glass Window Bridge and approaching embankments.
The airport highway money is a part of the $1 billion in loans set aside for the Caribbean by China. The Bahamas has been allocated $150 million of that amount.
Chinese loans are cheap. And The Bahamas is borrowing. What is tied to Chinese money in the developing world, however, is Chinese labor. When China lends or invests in poor countries, it sends lots of Chinese workers to construct the projects it finances.
For poor countries struggling to attract investment or to solicit financing, there is little resolve to make demands of the rising power.
Here in The Bahamas, Sarkis Izmirlian and Baha Mar needed financing. Baha Mar received that financing from China and it also received 8,150 foreign workers (who mostly will be Chinese).
The government borrowed cheap money from China for the airport highway and it received 200 Chinese workers. How many hundreds of Chinese will be forced on The Bahamas to build the Family Island ports and infrastructure upgrades announced last week?
What Bahamians must understand is that when China lends, and it contracts its workers to do the work, a significant amount of the money borrowed goes back to China with the workers who build the project. They pay their workers with money we borrow.
In addition, The Bahamas gets the bill for the loan. Over the years, the interest and principal payments also go to China.
The Chinese also keep their workers on self-contained on-site camps when they are sent abroad. We barely even get them to visit our stores to spend the money we borrowed when they are working in our countries.
The Bahamas should embrace Chinese investment. Without Baha Mar, our near future would look less bright. But The Bahamas must be careful regarding the relationship it develops with China regarding the labor issue.
We lose a significant chuck of the value of these investments when our uneducated laborers are denied work because Chinese get these jobs.
China brilliantly creates unequal trade relationships. China’s manipulated currency has helped it suck a significant portion of manufacturing from the West. It then loans the cash it has made back to countries such as the United States to buy more of its products.
China is now the second largest economy in the world and in the near future it will displace the United States as the world largest economy.
Much debate is needed among our policymakers about the Bahamian-Chinese embrace. We must find ways to continue to attract Chinese money that comes with fewer Chinese workers attached.
We think Chinese investment should be welcomed. We also think a reasonable number of Chinese workers should be accepted. However, China building most of our infrastructure projects and commercial projects almost solely with Chinese labor is not acceptable.
If China does not budge to the representations of a small place such as this, or a small region such as ours, we then have to do some analysis to determine if it is wise to borrow as much from China as opposed to other commercial lenders who do not set similar labor requirements. This issue is not simple.
Bahamians have thus far been okay with China’s involvement in The Bahamas. But as the numbers of Chinese coming to country get larger and larger with each announced project, the attitude towards China in The Bahamas will change. When a country has a double-digit unemployment level, its citizens get upset when foreigners get lots of jobs in their country.
Our political parties must be careful with this relationship. More concessions on the labor issue are needed from a China that does not like to compromise.
3/15/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
The Bahamas has fallen fully into the embrace of China. And the rising empire has been kind with its “gifts.”
The $2.6 billion Baha Mar project and the $70 million airport highway are being financed by China. Last week, the government announced that the China Harbour Engineering Company Ltd. will build the North Abaco Port and by-pass road; a bridge between Little and Great Abaco; a port and by-pass highway in Exuma; and the Eleuthera Glass Window Bridge and approaching embankments.
The airport highway money is a part of the $1 billion in loans set aside for the Caribbean by China. The Bahamas has been allocated $150 million of that amount.
Chinese loans are cheap. And The Bahamas is borrowing. What is tied to Chinese money in the developing world, however, is Chinese labor. When China lends or invests in poor countries, it sends lots of Chinese workers to construct the projects it finances.
For poor countries struggling to attract investment or to solicit financing, there is little resolve to make demands of the rising power.
Here in The Bahamas, Sarkis Izmirlian and Baha Mar needed financing. Baha Mar received that financing from China and it also received 8,150 foreign workers (who mostly will be Chinese).
The government borrowed cheap money from China for the airport highway and it received 200 Chinese workers. How many hundreds of Chinese will be forced on The Bahamas to build the Family Island ports and infrastructure upgrades announced last week?
What Bahamians must understand is that when China lends, and it contracts its workers to do the work, a significant amount of the money borrowed goes back to China with the workers who build the project. They pay their workers with money we borrow.
In addition, The Bahamas gets the bill for the loan. Over the years, the interest and principal payments also go to China.
The Chinese also keep their workers on self-contained on-site camps when they are sent abroad. We barely even get them to visit our stores to spend the money we borrowed when they are working in our countries.
The Bahamas should embrace Chinese investment. Without Baha Mar, our near future would look less bright. But The Bahamas must be careful regarding the relationship it develops with China regarding the labor issue.
We lose a significant chuck of the value of these investments when our uneducated laborers are denied work because Chinese get these jobs.
China brilliantly creates unequal trade relationships. China’s manipulated currency has helped it suck a significant portion of manufacturing from the West. It then loans the cash it has made back to countries such as the United States to buy more of its products.
China is now the second largest economy in the world and in the near future it will displace the United States as the world largest economy.
Much debate is needed among our policymakers about the Bahamian-Chinese embrace. We must find ways to continue to attract Chinese money that comes with fewer Chinese workers attached.
We think Chinese investment should be welcomed. We also think a reasonable number of Chinese workers should be accepted. However, China building most of our infrastructure projects and commercial projects almost solely with Chinese labor is not acceptable.
If China does not budge to the representations of a small place such as this, or a small region such as ours, we then have to do some analysis to determine if it is wise to borrow as much from China as opposed to other commercial lenders who do not set similar labor requirements. This issue is not simple.
Bahamians have thus far been okay with China’s involvement in The Bahamas. But as the numbers of Chinese coming to country get larger and larger with each announced project, the attitude towards China in The Bahamas will change. When a country has a double-digit unemployment level, its citizens get upset when foreigners get lots of jobs in their country.
Our political parties must be careful with this relationship. More concessions on the labor issue are needed from a China that does not like to compromise.
3/15/2011
thenassauguardian editorial
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Foreign Workers on Bahamian Construction Sites
Foreigners on Bahamian construction sites
tribune242 editorial
THE DEBATE on the number of Chinese to be employed on the construction of the Baha Mar Cable Beach project -- six hotels, about a 100,000-square foot casino, a 200,000 square-foot convention centre, 20-acre beach and pool, 18-hole golf course and a 60,000-square foot retail village with additional residential products -- is going to be interesting, if and when it takes place on the floor of the House.
The number of foreign workers required by the Chinese as part of the deal is unusually large. But it is well known that the Chinese do not approve foreign loans unless their workforce is employed as a major part of the loan project. In the case of Baha Mar -- valued at about $2.5 billion - $1.918,965,693 billion has been negotiated with the China Construction Company as primary contractors. With that financial outlay it is amazing that government was able to negotiate any Bahamian presence. As Mr Ingraham said in presenting his resolution for this project to the House "the foreign labour component intended during the construction for the resort exceeds levels ever experienced in the Bahamas and is beyond anything ever contemplated by my government."
Under the UBP, construction up to a certain value was reserved for Bahamian contractors. Over that value it was agreed that Bahamians did not yet have the expertise or equipment to handle very large jobs and so those were left to foreign contractors, such as McAlpine, Balfour Beatty and others. In the 1950s, said Mr Ingraham, the government permitted 25 per cent of the labour force in construction and/or the operation of tourism development to be foreign.
During the Pindling era, however, the foreign labour component increased and newspaper articles recorded protests, either by foreign workers complaining of working conditions, or Bahamians questioning their presence in the Bahamas. For example, in 1988, 600 angry Indians went on hunger strike on the construction site of the Crystal Palace Hotel, Cable Beach. They accused the foreign contractor, Balfour Beatty, of treating them as slaves. Earlier - in 1981 - the Construction and Civil Engineering Union picketed the construction site of government's $66.5 million Cable Beach Hotel. "They import Filipinos to shovel sand. You tell me no Bahamans can do that?" complained a Bahamian worker. There were 40 Filipinos on that job site.
But the 1990 demonstration to protest the employment of common labourers -- truck drivers for example -- from Brazil on government's $55 million Nassau International Airport expansion was particularly interesting. The ratio of foreigners to Bahamians was 70 per cent on that construction site with government having to pay a large penalty if the number of Bahamians went over the agreed 139 or 30 per cent of the total work force. This prompted the carrying of placards that read: "It's Better in the Bahamas for Brazilians!"
At one point during the contract there were more than 340 Brazilians at the construction site, bringing the Brazilian count to 71 per cent compared to the 139 Bahamians that the company had agreed to use during this period.
The Pindling government had agreed that for every five Bahamians hired by the Brazilian company over the agreed 139 Bahamian workers, the government would have to pay $88,000 or $17,000 for each worker.
In the House on April 30, 1990, then Opposition Leader Hubert Ingraham revealed that the Pindling government had also agreed to pay all of the Brazilian company's Customs and stamp duties, work permit fees for their workers, and building fees on mechanical and electrical permits. In addition government was to pay all public utility fees -- connections and the like -- except for the actual electrical consumption.
The FNM found it preposterous that government would be penalised if more than 139 Bahamians were hired at the airport. "It is incredible that the Government has agreed to pay extra monies for Bahamians to work in their own country," said the FNM.
When the Ingraham government came to power its policy on foreign labour was established on the resort properties of Kerzner International -- the ratio of Bahamians to non-Bahamians on that site was not to exceed 30 per cent foreign to 70 per cent Bahamian.
And now here were the Chinese financially backing the transformation of Cable Beach into a mega tourist resort and asking for 8,150 of their countrymen to be engaged on the "core project". The projection is that some 1,200 Bahamians will be engaged in construction of the non-core projects.
Because of the unusual request for foreign labour -- 71 per cent foreign to 29 per cent Bahamian -- Prime Minister Ingraham has brought the matter to the House to give the Opposition an opportunity to express the opinions of their constituents on the matter. Both sides have to determine - in the words of Mr Ingraham - "whether this invaluable benefit of skills transfer and improved exposure to new technologies can or will occur in a project where contact between Bahamians and foreign experts is likely to be limited." Bahamians also have to decide whether in these lean years this project, with its foreign labour, is what they believe will jump start their economy.
September 28, 2010
tribune242 editorial
tribune242 editorial
THE DEBATE on the number of Chinese to be employed on the construction of the Baha Mar Cable Beach project -- six hotels, about a 100,000-square foot casino, a 200,000 square-foot convention centre, 20-acre beach and pool, 18-hole golf course and a 60,000-square foot retail village with additional residential products -- is going to be interesting, if and when it takes place on the floor of the House.
The number of foreign workers required by the Chinese as part of the deal is unusually large. But it is well known that the Chinese do not approve foreign loans unless their workforce is employed as a major part of the loan project. In the case of Baha Mar -- valued at about $2.5 billion - $1.918,965,693 billion has been negotiated with the China Construction Company as primary contractors. With that financial outlay it is amazing that government was able to negotiate any Bahamian presence. As Mr Ingraham said in presenting his resolution for this project to the House "the foreign labour component intended during the construction for the resort exceeds levels ever experienced in the Bahamas and is beyond anything ever contemplated by my government."
Under the UBP, construction up to a certain value was reserved for Bahamian contractors. Over that value it was agreed that Bahamians did not yet have the expertise or equipment to handle very large jobs and so those were left to foreign contractors, such as McAlpine, Balfour Beatty and others. In the 1950s, said Mr Ingraham, the government permitted 25 per cent of the labour force in construction and/or the operation of tourism development to be foreign.
During the Pindling era, however, the foreign labour component increased and newspaper articles recorded protests, either by foreign workers complaining of working conditions, or Bahamians questioning their presence in the Bahamas. For example, in 1988, 600 angry Indians went on hunger strike on the construction site of the Crystal Palace Hotel, Cable Beach. They accused the foreign contractor, Balfour Beatty, of treating them as slaves. Earlier - in 1981 - the Construction and Civil Engineering Union picketed the construction site of government's $66.5 million Cable Beach Hotel. "They import Filipinos to shovel sand. You tell me no Bahamans can do that?" complained a Bahamian worker. There were 40 Filipinos on that job site.
But the 1990 demonstration to protest the employment of common labourers -- truck drivers for example -- from Brazil on government's $55 million Nassau International Airport expansion was particularly interesting. The ratio of foreigners to Bahamians was 70 per cent on that construction site with government having to pay a large penalty if the number of Bahamians went over the agreed 139 or 30 per cent of the total work force. This prompted the carrying of placards that read: "It's Better in the Bahamas for Brazilians!"
At one point during the contract there were more than 340 Brazilians at the construction site, bringing the Brazilian count to 71 per cent compared to the 139 Bahamians that the company had agreed to use during this period.
The Pindling government had agreed that for every five Bahamians hired by the Brazilian company over the agreed 139 Bahamian workers, the government would have to pay $88,000 or $17,000 for each worker.
In the House on April 30, 1990, then Opposition Leader Hubert Ingraham revealed that the Pindling government had also agreed to pay all of the Brazilian company's Customs and stamp duties, work permit fees for their workers, and building fees on mechanical and electrical permits. In addition government was to pay all public utility fees -- connections and the like -- except for the actual electrical consumption.
The FNM found it preposterous that government would be penalised if more than 139 Bahamians were hired at the airport. "It is incredible that the Government has agreed to pay extra monies for Bahamians to work in their own country," said the FNM.
When the Ingraham government came to power its policy on foreign labour was established on the resort properties of Kerzner International -- the ratio of Bahamians to non-Bahamians on that site was not to exceed 30 per cent foreign to 70 per cent Bahamian.
And now here were the Chinese financially backing the transformation of Cable Beach into a mega tourist resort and asking for 8,150 of their countrymen to be engaged on the "core project". The projection is that some 1,200 Bahamians will be engaged in construction of the non-core projects.
Because of the unusual request for foreign labour -- 71 per cent foreign to 29 per cent Bahamian -- Prime Minister Ingraham has brought the matter to the House to give the Opposition an opportunity to express the opinions of their constituents on the matter. Both sides have to determine - in the words of Mr Ingraham - "whether this invaluable benefit of skills transfer and improved exposure to new technologies can or will occur in a project where contact between Bahamians and foreign experts is likely to be limited." Bahamians also have to decide whether in these lean years this project, with its foreign labour, is what they believe will jump start their economy.
September 28, 2010
tribune242 editorial
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Work permits for about 5,000 Chinese workers to help construct the $2.6 billion Baha Mar Cable Beach resort ... Yea or Nay Bahamians?
PLP MPs expected to represent their constituents
tribune242 editorial
IT IS agreed by both government and opposition that the Bahamas needs a major project at this time to revive the construction industry and get as many Bahamians back to work as possible.
However, an off-the-cuff remark by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham that if the Baha Mar project were to go ahead, Atlantis' Phase Four would not, has been interpreted by PLP politicians to mean that if Mr Ingraham approved Baha Mar, he would not approve Atlantis Phase Four. It is strange how two groups of people can hear the same remark, yet come away with different interpretations. When we heard Mr Ingraham's short statement it was obvious to us that what he was saying was that the market could not successfully sustain two large tourist developments. It had nothing to do with any approval either given or withheld by him.
The remark pointed to the astute tourist entrepreneur Sol Kerzner. It was obvious that Mr Kerzner, considering his options against a depressed world market, would have second thoughts about gambling at this time with the large outlay required by his Phase Four plans for Atlantis if Baha Mar were to go ahead with essentially the same product. Cancellation, or postponement seemed obvious.
Mr Ingraham later clarified his remarks. He agreed that the country needed a major project, but pointed out that currently it only had 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.
However, before anything can be decided Bahamians have to agree on whether work permits should be approved for about 5,000 Chinese workers to help construct the $2.6 billion Baha Mar Cable Beach resort. We all know in the past that Bahamians have always protested foreigners being brought in for various projects, and so government has quite rightly said that this time -- the numbers required being so overwhelming -- that Bahamians will have to make the final decision. Therefore, the matter will be taken to parliament. But the Opposition has backed off. This, they claim is an Ingraham problem. They blame him for the Baha Mar-Harrah deal not going through -- forgetting that at the time of that deal it was their government that dragged its feet so long that Harrah's was sold and the new owners turned down the Baha Mar contract that was yet to be finally approved by the Christie government. The Christie-led Opposition, which if it had been more decisive could have clinched the Harrah deal before the sale, now say that Chinese labourers were not a part of the original equation and so it will have no part in the decision making on the floor of parliament.
The Opposition has always criticised Mr Ingraham for not consulting them or the nation sufficiently. He is now consulting the nation through the people's representatives, who now tell him that it is not necessary to bring the issue to parliament. But it is necessary. At no time has the Bahamas been faced with an influx of 5,000 foreign workers. Do Bahamians agree or not? The only persons who can answer this question are those MPs who they elected to parliament to speak on their behalf. If the people's representatives fail to do so, they have failed in their duty to their constituents, and there should be consequences.
Arguing that the Bahamian economy "desperately needs" the Cable Beach development, a former Bahamas Chamber of Commerce president urged Bahamians to vote out of office any MP who opposed the work permits. The Bahamas Contractors Association, in an effort to protect the Bahamian workforce, is preparing a three-tiered initiative to prepare construction workers and companies to bid for jobs when the Baha Mar construction starts. Baha Mar says there will be about 7,000 permanent jobs at the end of the construction and 3,300 temporary jobs during construction. Of course, as National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest says, "It also has to be factored in that this is a period of high unemployment and that has to be taken into account." He quite rightly believes that "members of parliament who represent the people of the Bahamas ought to have a say in an unusual labour component."
At the end of the day we hope that the BahaMar developers will have sense enough to go after different clientele and explore a different market to the Kerzner brand. However, it they plan to poach on Atlantis' guest list, and copy the One and Only identity, not only will Atlantis suffer, but so will the Bahamas because instead of growing, the overall tourist market will remain static. At present Sol Kerzner, a proven success in the resort business, provides secure employment for at least 2,500 Bahamians. In fact it is his enterprise alone that put the Bahamas back on the tourist map. However, if one resort starts to cripple the other, and the presence of Baha Mar fails to increase the market, Atlantis could start to cut back, which would leave Bahamians where?
This too has to be factored into the debate. This is no time for the PLP to play politics. Bahamians are the ones carrying the burden of their salaries during these lean times and so we expect them to justify their seats in parliament.
August 17, 2010
tribune242 editorial
tribune242 editorial
IT IS agreed by both government and opposition that the Bahamas needs a major project at this time to revive the construction industry and get as many Bahamians back to work as possible.
However, an off-the-cuff remark by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham that if the Baha Mar project were to go ahead, Atlantis' Phase Four would not, has been interpreted by PLP politicians to mean that if Mr Ingraham approved Baha Mar, he would not approve Atlantis Phase Four. It is strange how two groups of people can hear the same remark, yet come away with different interpretations. When we heard Mr Ingraham's short statement it was obvious to us that what he was saying was that the market could not successfully sustain two large tourist developments. It had nothing to do with any approval either given or withheld by him.
The remark pointed to the astute tourist entrepreneur Sol Kerzner. It was obvious that Mr Kerzner, considering his options against a depressed world market, would have second thoughts about gambling at this time with the large outlay required by his Phase Four plans for Atlantis if Baha Mar were to go ahead with essentially the same product. Cancellation, or postponement seemed obvious.
Mr Ingraham later clarified his remarks. He agreed that the country needed a major project, but pointed out that currently it only had 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.
However, before anything can be decided Bahamians have to agree on whether work permits should be approved for about 5,000 Chinese workers to help construct the $2.6 billion Baha Mar Cable Beach resort. We all know in the past that Bahamians have always protested foreigners being brought in for various projects, and so government has quite rightly said that this time -- the numbers required being so overwhelming -- that Bahamians will have to make the final decision. Therefore, the matter will be taken to parliament. But the Opposition has backed off. This, they claim is an Ingraham problem. They blame him for the Baha Mar-Harrah deal not going through -- forgetting that at the time of that deal it was their government that dragged its feet so long that Harrah's was sold and the new owners turned down the Baha Mar contract that was yet to be finally approved by the Christie government. The Christie-led Opposition, which if it had been more decisive could have clinched the Harrah deal before the sale, now say that Chinese labourers were not a part of the original equation and so it will have no part in the decision making on the floor of parliament.
The Opposition has always criticised Mr Ingraham for not consulting them or the nation sufficiently. He is now consulting the nation through the people's representatives, who now tell him that it is not necessary to bring the issue to parliament. But it is necessary. At no time has the Bahamas been faced with an influx of 5,000 foreign workers. Do Bahamians agree or not? The only persons who can answer this question are those MPs who they elected to parliament to speak on their behalf. If the people's representatives fail to do so, they have failed in their duty to their constituents, and there should be consequences.
Arguing that the Bahamian economy "desperately needs" the Cable Beach development, a former Bahamas Chamber of Commerce president urged Bahamians to vote out of office any MP who opposed the work permits. The Bahamas Contractors Association, in an effort to protect the Bahamian workforce, is preparing a three-tiered initiative to prepare construction workers and companies to bid for jobs when the Baha Mar construction starts. Baha Mar says there will be about 7,000 permanent jobs at the end of the construction and 3,300 temporary jobs during construction. Of course, as National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest says, "It also has to be factored in that this is a period of high unemployment and that has to be taken into account." He quite rightly believes that "members of parliament who represent the people of the Bahamas ought to have a say in an unusual labour component."
At the end of the day we hope that the BahaMar developers will have sense enough to go after different clientele and explore a different market to the Kerzner brand. However, it they plan to poach on Atlantis' guest list, and copy the One and Only identity, not only will Atlantis suffer, but so will the Bahamas because instead of growing, the overall tourist market will remain static. At present Sol Kerzner, a proven success in the resort business, provides secure employment for at least 2,500 Bahamians. In fact it is his enterprise alone that put the Bahamas back on the tourist map. However, if one resort starts to cripple the other, and the presence of Baha Mar fails to increase the market, Atlantis could start to cut back, which would leave Bahamians where?
This too has to be factored into the debate. This is no time for the PLP to play politics. Bahamians are the ones carrying the burden of their salaries during these lean times and so we expect them to justify their seats in parliament.
August 17, 2010
tribune242 editorial
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)