Showing posts with label political leaders Bahamas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political leaders Bahamas. Show all posts

Friday, January 20, 2012

Is there political ideology or philosophy in Bahamian politics? ...Is Hubert Ingraham a conservative? ...Is Perry Christie a liberal? ...Is Branville McCartney a centrist? ...Who knows? ...Fellow Bahamians - It is important to know the political philosophy of parties and their leaders

Is there political ideology or philosophy in Bahamian politics?



thenassauguardian editorial




We now know almost all the election candidates of the three parties with representation in the House of Assembly.  The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Free National Movement (FNM) have selected all the men and women who will run under their respective banners.  The Democratic National Alliance (DNA) has a few more to chose.

What is interesting is that each of the parties have a few candidates who have run for, or been supporters of, other parties.  There are some interesting examples.

For the PLP, Dr. Andre Rollins was a candidate in 2010 at the Elizabeth by-election for the National Development Party, and Dr. Bernard Nottage (the current Bain and Grants Town MP) led the Coalition for Democratic Reform against the PLP in the 2002 general election.

For the FNM, Cassius Stuart was the leader of the Bahamas Democratic Movement.  His colleagues on the FNM ticket Kenyatta Gibson, Edison Key and Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham are all former PLP MPs.

Dr. Madlene Sawyer, the DNA candidate for Southern Shores, was a former head of the PLP women’s branch.  Her DNA colleague Wallace Rolle ran for the PLP in the 2007 general election.  The DNA candidate for Bains Town and Grants Town, Rodney Moncur, was the leader of the obscure Worker’s Party before joining the DNA.  And Branville McCartney, the party’s leader, was a former FNM MP and Cabinet minister.

These are just a few prominent examples of the flow of people in Bahamian politics.  There are other candidates in the major parties who have been strong supporters of organizations opposed to the groups they are currently with.

What does it all mean?  Well, some would say nothing, as politicians in countries around the world change party affiliation all the time.  But, it could also be argued that the flow of people from party to party, running under any banner, exists here because there is little to no philosophical difference between the organizations.

In fact, it would be hard to use any traditional economic or political philosophy to describe any of the Bahamian political parties.  Could you describe the PLP, DNA or FNM as left or right wing, conservative or liberal?  No, you could not.

For example, in the 2012 Republican presidential race in the United States candidate Ron Paul is a libertarian.  Paul has very different view of the world from 2008 Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, who is a social democrat.  Libertarians are suspicious of the state and argue for small government and low rates of taxation.  Social democrats think the state and taxation should be used to advance social justice.

It is important to know the political philosophy of parties and their leaders.  When parties and leaders have strong beliefs, they bring forward policies that change the lives of people in distinct ways.  A libertarian would essentially eliminate welfare.  They do not think the wealth of individuals should be taken away by the state to be given to others with less wealth.

Social democrats always want more taxation to advance some Utopian social program to ‘help’ people.  The business climate changes significantly when one of these politicians is elected, as opposed to the other.

Is Hubert Ingraham a conservative?  Is Perry Christie a liberal?  Is Branville McCartney a centrist?  Who knows?  Lately, our elections have been run on management style.  Essentially, this is the essence of the debate: “I am a better man than you.  Vote for me.”

A cynic could argue that it is difficult to pin down the political philosophy of our parties and politicians because they have none.  Instead, they simply seek power to dispense the authority and wealth of the state.  The voters then choose the person they think most able, and that’s that.  The better manager manages things in a better ad hoc manner not under any recognizable system of ideals.

If this type of politics is good enough for the people, it will continue.  For something else to evolve the people would have to demand more of the process and the people involved.

Jan 20, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Branville McCartney and his Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party - are as much a threat to the governing Free National Movement (FNM) - as Perry Christie and his Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)

Rallying the FNM's troops
thenassauguardian editorial




When Branville McCartney launched his Democratic National Alliance (DNA) last week who was in attendance at the launch was as interesting as what was said by McCartney.

The Free National Movement (FNM) usually dominates in the wealthier parts of the country.

Constituencies such as Yamacraw, Killarney, Clifton, St. Anne’s and Montagu are out of the reach of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP). For various reasons, the middle and upper classes lean FNM.

At McCartney’s launch in that filled room at the Wyndham Cable Beach Resort, the people who looked excited, the people who chanted, the people who listened attentively dressed in their nice clothing looked like members of the same demographic groups the FNM does well in.

If an FNM landslide was imminent, losing a few supporters would not really matter. That would only mean that the party’s margins of victory in the various constituencies would be less.

In a close election, however, losing 100 to 200 FNM votes per constituency to a third party could cost the FNM most of the swing seats in the country.

We do not think FNM leader and Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham fears McCartney. However, he should fear the loss of FNM votes at a time when the electorate still appears closely divided between the two main parties.

To avoid this Ingraham would need to take a divisive stand and not ignore McCartney. He would need to tell FNMs that a vote for McCartney is a vote for the PLP, as each FNM vote that goes to a party that cannot form a government makes it easier for PLP leader Perry Christie to take back the government.

Older leaders tend to dismiss young upstarts. The old chief thinks the young man cannot threaten him because he has no experience and no record. And sadly, the sycophants (yes-men) who surround political leaders allow them to believe they are invincible. If the chief says the newcomer cannot threaten him, they agree.

Ingraham must avoid this trap if he wants to be prime minister a fourth time. McCartney is as much a threat to the FNM as Christie – just in a different way. A successful FNM will need all of its base onboard. McCartney would need to be branded as a tool of the PLP, in a way, to ensure that the base does not transgress and support a FNM son who has for the time being gone rouge.

To be sure he is getting the right advice, the PM should also ensure that his inner circle includes some people who regularly tell him things he does not like to hear; and things he does not believe. This election will be tough. All assumptions need to be set aside and the political landscape and mood need to be realistically assessed if the governing party is to be successful.

All of those men and women who think every word and thought uttered by the leader is gospel are as dangerous as the other parties. They help leaders believe their inaccurate perceptions and bad ideas are brilliant. Sober antagonistic advice is more useful.

A battle looms at the polls. The party that embraces wise strategy, discipline and organization will win.

5/18/2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Monday, May 9, 2011

So now the People's Government has decided that foreigners can invest in and own any restaurant or entertainment business in our beloved Commonwealth. How can The Bahamas Government justify such a decision?

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

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

W. A. Branville McCartney - M.P. for Bamboo Town - Contribution on the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation (BTC) / Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) Debate - 23rd, March 2011

Mr. Speaker, my aim is not to lecture, chastise, or insult the intelligence of any person in this Honourable House, and whereas, I may have only been a sitting member for a short time, I came in to this great place either knowing of and/or admiring many of these Honourable Men.

In fact, on many occasions, I remember silently thinking - in awe - what an honor and privilege it is to be sitting among the Members for North Abaco and Farm Road; indeed men who once spoke out emphatically on issues of truth, justice, and equality. So, in saying all that I have said before this, I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that my words – in any way – will not be an affront to any person and I hope that persons do not take offense to them. I would want you to know, Mr. Speaker, that, it is as a result of the courage and boldness that I have seen in some of these Honourable Men over the years, particularly when confronting issues of national importance, I am now emboldened to speak the following.

When I made the decision to enter into politics, I made that decision based on what I saw taking place in my social environment. Among other things, crime was rampant and people were no longer feeling safe in their own environment; dysfunction was at an all time high among our young people and they were failing out of society in larger numbers than ever before; for various reasons, political leaders were continuing to dishonor their office and bring shame on our sovereign nation; while the average Bahamian worked and struggled, the nation was coming undone at its seams. And it seemed as if no one cared; while the people suffered, it appeared to be all politics as usual.

At the time, I thought about my young daughters and wondered if the Bahamas that I saw unfolding before my eyes was the same Bahamas that I wanted for them. I thought about my wife going about her business, not knowing if, at anytime, she would or could become another robbery or murder statistics. I felt compelled to step forward and offer myself as a change agent, not just for my family but for all Bahamians and Bahamian families who were feeling trapped and powerless in a society that was imploding all around us. I was motivated by the idea that I could possibly be one of a few who could be that difference, indeed the difference maker, when it came to shaping the future direction of what is, potentially, the greatest nation in the world. My intention was and is to “be the change I want to see in the world”.

The question for me was, however, how did we allow this situation to occur? I think many of us can remember the excitement that Bahamians from all walks of life felt on July 10, 1973 when the Black, Gold, and Agua Marine was hoisted for the first time to signifying that the Bahamas was a free and independent nation. With this new flag replacing the old Union Jack, no longer were we going to be considered second class citizens in our own society, in our own country. No longer would we be, as Sir Etienne Dupuch puts it in his Tribune Story, seen so “far behind to be conscious of a destiny.” Independence was the promise of a new destiny. And the courage and boldness of a few exceptional men gave all of us - all Bahamians – the courage to dream again. We all become enchanted by the thought of the economic prosperity and social mobility that independence would bring us. We were all enchanted, as a nation, with the promise of empowerment that was to come with independence – a kind of empowerment that was unconceivable before 1973. What a concept:

· Economic empowerment – the thought that we would each have sufficient wealth to take care of our own personal needs;

· Political empowerment – the right to have a voice and say in the way our society is organized and how decisions are made; and

· Societal empowerment – where we would be treated fairly and equally.

For the average Bahamian this was the vision.

Empowerment! What a vision.

We are here today at each other’s throats, not just because the people are angry and worked up at the impending sale of BTC, but we are here today because, some forty years after independence, after decades of dangling the carrot of empowerment before them - offering a pittance here and a pittance there - Bahamian people are disillusioned, fed up with, and angry at feeling disempowered in their own land. And whereas the proposed sale of BTC is the matter before us today, this same sale of the telecommunications corporation is only a symbol of the disenfranchisement and lack of vision that continues to be a slap in the face to the average Bahamian who bought into the dream of independence – a dream that many have given up on as only an illusion.

I hope that, by making my statements today, my intentions in advocating for Bahamian empowerment will not be misconstrued, as I would be remised and, somewhat disingenuous, in not acknowledging the benefits which foreign investors and foreign investments have brought our people and our nation. However, to spend a great deal of time elaborating on that would serve no real purpose at this time, particularly since it has been “thrown” in the face of Bahamian people from time in memoriam. The point of the matter however, at this stage, is that Bahamian people, after decades and decades of educating themselves in some of the finest colleges and universities that the world has to offer, with the hopes of proving themselves, should now – my God - have an opportunity to prove their worth – to the highest degree – in their own country.

If Cable and Wireless is as great as our leaders are purporting them to be, let the government take it hands out of BTC’s operations, open up the market, let Cable and Wireless, Verizon, Sprint, Digicel, and any other provider who wish to enter the market come in. Let them “duke” it out, and may the best man win. But at the end of the day, Bahamians would have to prove their value and their worth,their intelligence and their ingenuity, and if they fail at it, then so be it. But, again, why does Cable and
Wireless need a three year head start on the competition? Politics, nothing more than pure politics.

I will paraphrase a good friend of mine who said that “some of us in society have allowed, and continue to allow our political leaders to us the time proven strategy of divide and conquer to cast one as
the enemy of the other, pitting us imprudently against each other to achieve their goals, while at the same time preventing us from achieving the simple ones we have set for ourselves and have worked so tirelessly to see actualized as a people – the creation of a nation that is a reflection of our collective and intellectual wills.

“At some point, however,” this friend continues, “we must recognize that we are not the enemy of each other, and no matter what our station or position is within society, we are all categorized and classified as Bahamians, and it is under this umbrella that we must collectively assemble” and challenge the political status quo that, for decades, has denied us as a people the right to have the semblance of power that independence has promised us.

What we have seen outside these walls in the past few weeks and days is a challenge to that very same political status quo; what we have seen is a new awakening in a generation that has been disenfranchised for too long – a new people who are crying out to be rescued from, as Martin Luther King calls it, a false sense of inferiority and a feeling of nobodiness.

On January 30, 1997, in one of his last addresses as leader of the Progressive Liberal Party, Sir Lynden Oscar Pindling said his vision for the Bahamas is that it becomes:

· “a nation built on Christian principles and consisting of a citizenry dedicated to respecting and defending human rights, human dignity, and the equal value of all mankind; a nation committed to the reverence for God, the sanctity of the traditional family, equal opportunity, diligent work for the welfare of all its citizens.

· He says the future Bahamas should be “a nation where the people are the most precious resource over and above all natural and material resources, and the national prosperity is measured by the quality of the health, education, and social environment and self esteem of its people;

· He says it should be “a nation where the individual and corporate productivity are synonymous with self-worth and where the love for work is esteemed as a national obligation;”

· But most importantly, he says that the Bahamas should be “a nation where economic diversity creates a broad spectrum of opportunities to challenge all the rich, creative talents, gifts, abilities, and ingenuity of the people, thus producing an atmosphere of variety, healthy competition, and entrepreneurship.”

Now, I have heard all of the colorful commentary over the past few years and month, as people have sought to offer up their analysis and interpretations of me, my actions and my intentions.

Some have said that I am a show-boater and that I like to showboat or indeed grandstand; some who doubt my ability to lead say that I am unqualified, but as one gospel psalmist says, God may not call the most qualified, but he qualifies those whom he calls; and some add that I am a young upstart, and that I should wait for my time; but King says, time is always ripe to do right, and now is the time to make real the promises of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. And over the next few weeks and months, and even years, as I seek to continue serving the people of Bamboo Town and the Bahamas, I am sure that the colorful commentaries, criticisms, and characterizations will only intensify as the naysayers will naysay in their attempts to discredit me and send me to my political graveyard. But I can assure you here today, as I stand in opposition to the offering up of the majority holdings in the Bahamas Telecommunications Corporation, no matter what commentaries are offered up about and against me, I promise the Bahamian people, from Grand Bahama in the north to Inagua in the south, Long Island to Rum Cay, from Baintown to Bamboo Town, from Ft. Charlotte to Ft. Fincastle, that God willing, I will continue to do what I entered politics in 2007 to do, and that is work to ensure that The Bahamas becomes a society free from the force of complacency brought on us by years and years of oppression, insensitivity, bitterness, and self-hate – a place where people can begin to feel a true sense of “somebodiness.”

Because, despite what some may say about us - despite what we have been fooled into believing about ourselves - we are a great people, and we have one of the greatest country in the world. As a matter of fact, Dr Miles Munroe always says and I agree, that ”The Bahamas is the place where God lives”.

That is why almost everyone in the world wants a piece of the Bahamian rock. But the time has come for us to stop giving ourselves away, particularly for cheaper cell phone rates! My Lord, my Lord.

Now, because I am reminded that our own dear Prime Minister is himself a transplant from the Progressive Liberal Party of old - (thank God for
radicalism, freedom of expression, and the freedom not to bandwagon) - and the illustrious leader of the opposition has remained a true stalwart, I say what I am about to say without fear of reprisal; In an attempt to get our country back on track, it is time for a revisiting of Sir Lynden’s vision for The Bahamas.

It is time for us to come up with strategies where, as a nation and people, we can continue to use and sustain a moderate tourism and financial product as revenue generators, while at the same time, find new ways to diversify our economy by creating a broad spectrum of opportunities to challenge all the rich, creative talents, gifts, abilities, and ingenuity of the Bahamian people; our country is brimming with a whole generation of young people out there waiting to take up the call. I know!!!!! I speak with young people everyday!! I am a young person and the young people are listening and they will make the difference!!!!!!

We must begin to lay the framework for an economy that is less based on physical capital in favor of one that is more dependent on human capital, for as Ralph Massey says, “human capital is more important to the public welfare than is physical capital.”

We must move away from an economy that thrives primarily on imported goods and servitude, and create one which is more of a producer model, driven primarily on exported goods and services – in many forms – created by manufacturing innovation and invention.

We must have a plan for the mobilization of our land mass, where each island will be developed and advanced so as to play an integral part in the country’s well being.

We must see to it that education is harnessed and used as the tool by which Bahamians, using the ingenuity derived from a quality education, will be able to meet more of their own consumer needs, and at the same time, meet and fulfill the needs of many of the global neighbors, particularly those in other Caribbean nations.

We must clearly define our national needs and stop allowing others to come in from the outside to define them for us. The future model for The Bahamas must be one in which we have a clear vision of the direction that we want our country to go in, and – God forbid – in the absence of qualified Bahamians, we invite a qualified labor force in to assist us with the building of our national dreams – instead of us using our labor to continually build the dreams of others.

Only when we begin to move in these directions, valuing the people as the most precious resource, will we become “a nation where the individual and corporate productivity are synonymous with selfworth and where the love for work is esteemed as a national obligation”

Again it is unfortunate that we have gotten to this day such a day in our history, and I am being put in a position such as this, but what is becoming evident all around us, once again quoting Martin Luther King, “oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself;” this is what we are now experiencing at this momentous time in our history.

The uprising taking place in our country says that we as a people have come full circle in our quest for true independence. And we have lost faith in our chosen leaders to deliver on the promises made decades ago, even years ago.

Disappointingly, I bring my contribution on this debate to a close by quoting from the Honourable Member from North Abaco who once said, among other things, that his job, as leader, is to “anticipate the future as best as he can and to act in the people’s interest.” At that time in 1997, our Prime Minister said to the people of the nation, “because I believe that Bahamians ought to own the majority in Batelco, I shall never, never, ever sell the majority holding in Batelco to anyone other than Bahamians.”

He also said, “I have stated often that I do not want to be elected to office promising one thing, knowing I am going to do another, but neglecting to say what I am going to do, just to get elected.” What a difference 14 years makes. At the time, it was just a matter of trust.

Now, however, some 14 years later, it is regrettable that the promise of empowerment made to the people of the Bahamas - captured in the phrase “never, never, ever” - a promise that they were told that they could trust, is being flagrantly tossed aside as a miscalculation of the time; Time and time Bahamians have showed that they are a trusting people, willing to take any old thing at face value because they want to believe in truth and honesty.

But how many more broken political promises can an already broken people take before they say enough is enough?

I hope that when we see the marches and the demonstrations, and hear of resignations, and other forms of civil protests, we will not be so quick to deplore these marches and demonstrations, and resignations, and other forms of protest without expressing similar, strong criticism for the
conditions that brought about the marches and the demonstrations, and resignations, and other forms of civil protests.

As I take my seat, I think it is quite obvious that I have no intentions of lending my support to the government’s plan to give over to Cable and Wireless a majority holding in the country’s telecommunications corporation. For the sake of a brighter future for our country, I hope that there will be others of my former colleagues who will be ready to rise above the fray and put aside political allegiances and alliances, to give our people - your people - a vote of confidence in their ability to be innovators, to be owners, and to be operators in a democratic, free market economy; I hope today that we will be affording them some semblance of pride and dignity by voting against this that is before us, and where and when they falter, be a source of encouragement for their betterment; I hope that some of my fellow colleagues will find the courage to show their individual character, and join me in attempting to begin the process of delivering to the Bahamian people the economical, political, and societal empowerment that they have so long been promised but denied.

It is not just me, not just those on the opposite side of the isle, and not just those demonstrating and protesting outside these walls who are making this request; if you have really looked around at our society in the last decade or so, you will have recognized that our entire society is, in some ways, crying out for a vote of confidence. Let us do what is right for a nation. I ask that you and other Bahamians join me and let us turn back the tides of injustice by saying NO to Cable and Wireless as majority owners in BTC.

Bahamas Blog International