In light of the challenges that our economy faces and the general consensus that we must revisit our economic model... it is disturbing to see that little is being said about the proposed fiscal policies of political parties as we enter the heart of the 2012 general election campaign

Confronting the debt crisis pt. 2

by Arinthia S. Komolafe

Last week we explored the effects that monetary policy at the turn of the millennium may have had upon the current mortgage and overall debt crisis.  As several individuals are calling for a further reduction of the discount and prime rates (DR and PR), it is important to note the impact such a move will have on individuals’ credit positions and financial wellbeing.

There is no doubt that the reduction of the DR and PR proved beneficial to the government in that it provided the government with an opportunity to service its debt at a lower interest rate, even though the overall benefits to consumers appears to be minimal.  On the other hand, the reduction of the DR and PR would have negatively impacted some organizations, Financial Institutions (FIs) and the National Insurance Board, as they would have lost millions of dollars in investment income.

In the final analysis, FIs usually win and are rarely dealt the bad hand of the stick in any situation within a credit-driven and consumer society like The Bahamas.  Financial Institutions in response to the aforementioned reduction imposed charges in other strategic areas, increased some of their fees and maintained their rates for consumer loans.  We have witnessed quiet increases in FIs’ fees for transactions such as ATM or passbook withdrawals – service charges on accounts and additional fees were applied to loans in the aftermath of the rate reductions.  A well-known fact is that the ultimate and main loser is usually the consumer who on the one hand receives a ‘supposed’ break on his debt servicing due to the DR and PR reduction, but pays hidden fees and charges on the other hand.

The net effect on the consumer is that he/she ends up paying the same amount and in some cases more to the FIs, which may result in non-performing loans or lost property to foreclosure.  This reinforces the point that an active Consumer Protection Commission ought to be in place to provide checks and balance on behalf of consumers relating to financial transactions among other things.

In addition to providing debt-servicing relief, it is expected that further reduction in the DR and PR should have also provided access to credit at a cheaper rate for individual and business consumers. The positive effect for business owners is that it creates the opportunity for expansion of the business and/or maintenance of inventory levels.  However, it is estimated that approximately one third of commercial banking loans extended to Bahamian companies are in arrears.  If businesses are faced with increased energy and gas costs combined with tax increases in National Insurance, business license fees and other diverse areas, it becomes less possible for businesses to be sustained during the current economic climate and more importantly create jobs that will help stem the growing unemployment rate.

The likelihood of FIs extending credit under already constrained circumstances is lower than normal and the underwriting of new loans is being done with extreme caution – a prudent course of action.  This further emphasizes and highlights the importance of and the urgent need for a functional and effective credit bureau.  It is noted that the Central Bank of The Bahamas had obtained assistance from the Caribbean Regional Technical Assistance Center (CARTAC) with the aim of establishing a credit bureau, albeit the process has been ongoing for a few years.  Considering the history of adjustments to the DR and PR, these rates are normally revised (downwards for the most part) not more frequently than in five-year intervals.  Whereas this does not suggest that monetary policy should be stalled or be predictable, the historical trends suggest that there is ample time to establish a credit bureau prior to any potential adjustments to the DR and PR.

What are the fiscal policies of the political parties?

In light of the challenges that our economy faces and the general consensus that we must revisit our economic model, it is disturbing to see that little is being said about the proposed fiscal policies of political parties as we enter the heart of the general election campaign.  It is a well-known fact that during the election campaign seasons in the past, we have heard politicians produce their grand ideas of what they intend to do for the Bahamian people.  The important part of the equation is, however, often omitted and very rarely if ever do we hear about how they propose to ‘foot the bill’ for their grand but necessary ideas.

It seems inevitable that the next government post the 2012 general election will have to continue this spate of borrowing at least during year one of governance to ensure the government is able to meet its obligations.  Fortunately, government debt servicing has been aided by one-off payments in 2011 from the sale of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company and capital inflows from Baha Mar. However, the likelihood of similar capital injections for 2012 is slim.  A part from a significant turnaround and increase in tourism numbers and the government’s ability to constrain its spending habits, it is difficult to see how we will get ourselves up out of this national disaster.

Our politicians seem to have mastered the art of avoiding reality and failing to inform us that hard decisions will have to be made.  In essence, austerity measures are not unforeseeable and it could be argued that these measures are unavoidable.  Of course such declarations are unpopular (albeit they would be truthful) and politicians fear the potential backlash of such honesty.  The government has continued to borrow in the midst of declining revenues and increased taxes that placed a heavy burden on the Bahamian people.  It would not be surprising, therefore, if the current tax levels are maintained or increased to meet budget requirements.  Unfortunately, the persons most affected by these tax burdens form part of the working and shrinking middle classes.  In the absence of foreign direct investment or new sources of revenue, any reduction in taxes will most certainly require the government to carry out extreme measures to cut its spending, increase the efficiency of state-owned enterprises to stop wastage and implement efficient tax collection policies.

The national debt crisis constitutes an unwanted and unsolicited gift to future generations of Bahamians that threaten their opportunity for economic prosperity.  This crisis and prevailing macroeconomic indicators makes it difficult to see any significant economic growth in the near future.  Our leaders and all of us must rise above the partisan politics and make a concerted effort to place our economy back on track.

 

• Arinthia S. Komolafe is an attorney-at-law.  Comments can be directed at: arinthia.komolafe@komolafelaw.com

Confronting the Bahamian debt crisis pt. 1

Mar 15, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

As we all sit and evaluate the political parties and independent candidates who will offer for public office in the run-up to the 2012 general election... we should make every effort to determine if there is someone on the ballot good enough to vote for...

Does it matter if you vote?

thenassauguardian editorial

Interesting debates always emerge when the question is posed as to whether or not citizens living in democracies should feel obligated to vote.

Most democracies were fought for.  People who campaigned for freedom, self-governance and civil rights were jailed; some were murdered; some were beaten and many others were victimized.  Some of these fights were actual wars.

In this context, we all should take the vote seriously.  It is not a right, but a gift fought for by those who came before us.

As we all sit and evaluate the political parties and independent candidates who will offer for public office in the run-up to the next general election, we should make every effort to determine if there is someone on the ballot good enough to vote for.

Those who do not think there is anyone good enough to vote for should consider entering the race or the political process.

But if the ballot is filled with poor candidates, what should a voter do?  Should voters feel compelled to vote?

No, they should not.  Voting is an important part of the democratic process.  However, voting should not be confused with democracy.  Democracy is about self-governance.  As citizens, we have a responsibility to do this everyday – not just every five years.

By working at a charity, providing assistance to the homeless, democracy is at work;  by volunteering as a mentor at a school, democracy is at work; by raising an educated, hardworking law-abiding citizen, democracy is at work.

So for those who think there is no reasonable offering to vote for at the next general election, you should rest assured that there are many other ways to participate in the advancement and governance of The Bahamas.

A group of residents in a community can easily come together, approach their public school, and start an after-school literacy program for the children falling behind, for example.

Simple initiatives such as these, if done by many individuals or by many groups, can do much to change the lives of the disadvantaged and the soon-to-be lost.

Elections are important; voting is important.  But if you think the mainstream political parties are pathetic and the independents are incompetent, do not distress.  You can exercise your democratic power everyday by doing something to help build the community.

Jan 21, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

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

Caribbean Blog International

The politicians and the politics of the 1990s -- even of 2007 -- are obsolete... And as far as the politics of The Bahamas is concerned, both of our long-standing parties have seemed comfortable with the formula bequeathed to us by our colonial forefathers; a pepper-pot of traditionalism in some areas and a discourse of modernisation in others -- a dish which has resulted in the gradual disintegration of the Bahamian middle class over the last decade in the face of a global economy in transition, concentrating wealth more and more in fewer peoples' hands

Making the case for a national political debate



By JOEY GASKINS


EXPLICITLY, my intention is to present an argument for why I believe this election season requires a debate between the leaders of the three most visible political parties.

There are, I would argue, questions that remain concerning the lack of any pronounced or marked ideological difference between these three parties, and in these difficult times the Bahamas needs thoughtful and critical leadership.

Public debate should enrich the political process and supply Bahamians with varying and alternative imaginings of our possibilities as nation. It seems clear to me that the level of public debate in the Bahamas cannot adequately answer this challenge.

As a bonus, I hope this piece will also serve as an indictment of politics as usual in the Bahamas and an appeal directed especially at young voters. Those with influence often accuse us of apathy while simultaneously shirking responsibility for our current condition.

I fear that we will follow in their footsteps -- deifying political leaders and being baptised in red, yellow or green (or whatever the colours of the day are) on the altar of our own political immaturity. This is not the time to reify that tradition; we know now where that path leads. Look around you.

Bahamians have unfortunately been let down by a great deal of our erstwhile political pundit class, many of whom seem, quite frankly, bitter. A number of these political commentators betray what can only be described as hurt feelings and personal vendettas in their writing and on the radio.

In turn they've become the spin doctors of choice for their patron political parties, making house calls even. I'm certainly skeptical that they can be relied on to provide non-partisan opinions and I've long since rid myself of the expectation that this particular sphere of influence will ever mount a meaningful challenge to the status quo.

Colin A Hughes reminds us in his book, Race and Politics in the Bahamas, during the run-up to the 1967 election, the two most read papers in the Bahamas, The Tribune and The Nassau Guardian, both seemed to support the ruling United Bahamian Party (UBP).

These days there is no white supremacist regime that must be challenged. Instead, the status quo is represented by the uncritical and empty party politics that characterises our electoral contests.

As the revolutionary theorist, Antonio Gramsci, makes clear, there are two types of intellectuals: those who align with emergent, new intellectual and social forces, and those who work to maintain the old. The Bahamas has more than its fair share of the latter.

Facebook has seemingly provided an opportunity for more democratic political debate. However, upon closer inspection, you realise that only a few people are actually speaking.

The walls for Bahamian political Facebook groups are dominated by a small fraction of the members, most of whom are vehemently partisan mouth pieces for their team of choice.

I use the word "team" carefully, because many Bahamians treat political parties like they would a sport team -- counting who had the most people at the home game, idolising the star quarterback, comparing the roster and trash talking.

Most sports teams are devoid of ideology and I would argue our political parties are as well. For the majority of Bahamians, I would imagine that this doesn't matter; what counts is which team scores the winning touchdown. We've yet to learn that in this kind of a game everyone loses.
Sadly, referencing Hughes' book, you will quickly learn that in the early years of the 20th century the Bahamian electorate viewed the election season as a chance to get something for nothing -- then it was rum and rice. What is now, a free T-shirt and a Christmas ham?

When, as made clear by the Bahamian Wikileaks, our politicians are comfortable claiming that "free paraphernalia" is one of the most important factors in winning an election, this particular piece of history becomes significant.

Hughes' also remarks that for politicians, elections amounted to nothing more than sporting events, a game between peers carried out over generations. Ninety plus years later and things seems remarkably the same. Maybe it's an age thing but when politicians shout, "Come on down," at each other across the parliamentary aisle I can't help but think of "The Price is Right."

The lack of universal participation on Facebook may be because of apathy, but I've observed another possible explanation: outsiders and disagreeable opinions are not welcome.

In preparation for this article I decided to engage in some informal ethnographic research. I even participated in the discussion on few posts as an independent voter.

In one particular instance, my intervention was not appreciated. According to one of the regulars, my point of view apparently violated the "wisdom of God." And when I pointed out the wisdom of God, as espoused by man, has been used by man to inflict pain and suffering, no less on our own ancestors, things got ugly.

The good Christian who originally countered my argument Biblically, called me everything but a child of God, blocked me and apparently continued insulting me so that I could not respond. Meanwhile, others rushed to the post, and with a click of the "Like" button and "lol" in repetition, they patted each other on their virtual backs for maintaining a comfortable level of ignorance and aggressively defending business as usual.

This perhaps provides some insight: even on Facebook, where the access to political debate has been democratised, only certain people get to speak about certain things, and only in certain ways. There is no space on the Bahamian political landscape for alternative political discourses and few have been brave enough to try and make space.

Go off the reservation, show the ruptures of illogicality in age-old political wisdom, the senselessness in so-called political common sense, and face a collective wrath.

You can dare to question the status-quo but know that at the very least you and possibly your family will be blocked, insulted and laughed at. This is something made intelligible after my last article for this paper. My untraditional (dare I say un-Bahamian) position on homosexuality cost a family member a job opportunity. None of this makes for meaningful, respectful or productive debate, does it?

How then can a national political debate transform the grim picture I've just painted?

Honestly, it can't. But, it is a step in the right direction. Against my better judgment, I want to suggest that if anyone should be responsible for showing the Bahamian people how to conduct the kind of political debates necessary for us arrive at the best political conclusion for our country, it is our political leaders.

A nationally televised, internet streamed, radio broadcast of our two seasoned political leaders and the firebrand new contender debating policy, defining differences in ideology and comparing visions of the Bahamian future is beneficial for all, especially the Bahamian people.

I know I'm not alone when I say that I'm interested in hearing what our hopeful leaders have to offer, outside of the theatrics of adversarial parliamentary posturing and away from the throngs of adoring fans. Despite the fact that some political leaders believe they must no longer compete for their inevitable ascendancy, that they are tried and tested, these are new and unusual times.

The politicians and the politics of the 1990s -- even of 2007 -- are obsolete. And as far as the politics of the Bahamas is concerned, both of our long-standing parties have seemed comfortable with the formula bequeathed to us by our colonial forefathers, a pepper-pot of traditionalism in some areas and a discourse of modernisation in others -- a dish which has resulted in the gradual disintegration of the Bahamian middle class over the last decade in the face of a global economy in transition, concentrating wealth more and more in fewer peoples' hands.

This is also not the most opportune time for a greenhorn politician to stake a leadership claim with a less than impressive political resume. The simple answer would be to say the Bahamas needs a new politician or a new political party, when in actuality what I think we need is a new politics. I am left unconvinced that, in what has become a politics plagued by ego, we should suffer yet another political contender asserting his dominion over our government with an air of entitlement.

Prime Minister Ingraham could once and for all show the truth of the Free National Movement's record, and himself as a man of action. Mr Christie could mount a clear opposition to the FNM, and set out a bold vision for the Bahamas as imagined by the Progressive Liberal Party. It would also benefit Mr McCartney, who could finally show all of those who doubt him that he can contend on the national level and that Democratic National Alliance's promises of hope for the Bahamian people are not empty.

Not only is it time for Prime Minister Ingraham, Mr Christie and Mr. McCartney to explain why any of them should be allowed to stand at our country's helm in these rough waters, but it is time for the people of this country to require it of them. In the past, we've failed to hold our leaders truly accountable.

When the Prime Minister feels it is within his right to say that the new contender won't be carrying "his tings" anywhere, the Bahamian people must necessarily retort, "Tell us why you think you'll be carrying our tings anywhere?"

When the leader of the opposition places the blame for our country's current economic condition squarely on the shoulders of the sitting government, the Bahamian people must necessarily inquire, "How does your partisan rhetoric square with the reality of a global economic downturn, and what exactly would you do differently?"

When the dewy political newcomer promises change and hope, the Bahamian people must necessarily interrogate - "How do you intend to deliver given the greenness of you and your party -- a hastily stitched together team of entrants -- and what can you offer that will change the game?"

And, when the only difference between the various parties seem to be colour scheme and personality, aren't we really choosing between parties intent on steering us basically down the same path, perhaps some more vigorously than others?

To echo a ghost from the Bahamian political past, and referencing Hughes' book yet again, in 1971 the youthful Vanguard Nationalist and Socialist Party (VNSP) wrote of the PLP, "The lack of a basic and coherent political philosophy ...has been a major factor in its failure ...to correct the abuses of Bahamian society by the wealthy few, to create genuine political and economic opportunity."

When it comes to politics, in the same way the media and the electorate have remained seemingly unchanged decades later, I would argue that the charge levied against the PLP in 1971 is true of all our political parties today. You may not like the source but they had a point then and they have point now.

What we have here is not a failure to communicate but a history of neglect concerning the Bahamian political consciousness by the Bahamian political elite -- neglect that, in the end, benefits them. It's time we do something differently.

They say a people deserves its leaders. If that is true, it begs the question, what kind of a people are we?

Post-1973 Bahamians have often shown themselves to be a people divided by frivolous considerations like loyalty to political parties with no clear ideological direction and politicians that are scandal ridden, self-indulgent and entitled.

Because of our inability to unite around holding our political leaders accountable, those whose interests are contrary to the welfare of the Bahamian working and middle classes often succeed in having those interests met.

I hate to use polemical and loaded phrases like "ruling class" and "foreign interests," but as Bahamians battle each other over an ever-widening terrain, even on virtual socialscapes like Facebook, it is the Bahamian bourgeoisie, the ruling class, and foreign interests that benefit from this distraction.

Our leaders should be the ones fighting -- warring for our trust and confidence, crusading for our well-being. Until we demand that our government and the opposition speak to their value outside of the comfortable, staged events of political rallies and the "Real Politicians of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas" docudrama that is our parliament proceedings (divas, cat fights and all), those of us who the government should serve -- the people -- will find ourselves left fighting over whatever gets tossed our way. And sadly, at this moment, there's not much to go around.

Joey Gaskins is a graduate of Ithaca College, Ithaca, NY with a BA in Politics. He was born in Grand Bahama and is currently studying at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) where he has attained his MSc in Race, Ethnicity and Post-Colonial Studies and has begun a Doctoral Degree in Sociology. Joey also writes for the Bahamas Weekly and the Nassau Liberal.

December 30, 2011

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

As we all sit and evaluate the political parties and independent candidates who will offer for public office in the run-up to the 2012 general election... we should make every effort to determine if there is someone on the ballot good enough to vote for

Exercise your democratic power

thenassauguardian editorial

Interesting debates always emerge when the question is posed as to whether or not citizens living in democracies should feel obligated to vote.

Most democracies were fought for.  People who campaigned for freedom, self-governance and civil rights were jailed, some were murdered, some were beaten and many others were victimized.  Some of these fights were actual wars.

In this context, we all should take the vote seriously.  It is not a right, but a gift fought for by those who came before us.

As we all sit and evaluate the political parties and independent candidates who will offer for public office in the run-up to the next general election, we should make every effort to determine if there is someone on the ballot good enough to vote for.

Those who do not think there is anyone good enough to vote for should consider entering the race or the political process.

But if the ballot is filled with poor candidates, what should a voter do?  Should voters feel compelled to vote?

No, they should not.  Voting is an important part of the democratic process.  However, voting should not be confused with democracy.  Democracy is about self-governance.  As citizens, we have a responsibility to do this everyday – not just every five years.

By working at a charity, providing assistance to the homeless, democracy is at work;  by volunteering as a mentor at a school, democracy is at work; by raising an educated, hardworking law-abiding citizen, democracy is at work.

So for those who think there is no reasonable offering to vote for at the next general election, you should rest assured that there are many other ways to participate in the advancement and governance of The Bahamas.

A group of residents in a community can easily come together, approach their public school, and start an afterschool literacy program for the children falling behind, for example.

Simple initiatives such as these, if done by many individuals or by many groups, can do much to change the lives of the disadvantaged and the soon-to-be lost.

Elections are important; voting is important.  But if you think the mainstream political parties are pathetic and the independents are incompetent, do not distress.  You can exercise your democratic power everyday by doing something to help build the community.

Nov 22, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

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

Philip Galanis says: Branville McCartney did not offer concrete solutions on how his new political party will tackle the myriad problems facing The Bahamas in his recent Democratic National Alliance (DNA) launch speech

McCartney's DNA offered no concrete solutions to country's problems


By TANEKA THOMPSON
Tribune Staff Reporter
tthompson@tribunemedia.net



BRANVILLE McCartney did not offer concrete solutions on how his new political party will tackle the myriad problems facing the country, said former Senator Philip Galanis.

Mr Galanis' comments came days after the launch of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) and the unveiling of 10 candidates who will vie for constituency seats under the party's banner in the next election. Mr Galanis said more tangible plans will likely be forthcoming over the next few weeks or months, but he believes that those looking for answers from Mr McCartney last week were disappointed.

"I would be very interested in understanding how Mr McCartney is going to be able to solve the country's issues and challenges.

"He spoke much about the things that need to be addressed, which we all know, but we didn't get a sense of how he's going to address that. I think that's what people want to hear, how are we going to get a hold on crime, how are we going to improve the economy and create jobs - people want specifics," said Mr Galanis when contacted by The Tribune yesterday.

"(For all the parties) if they are going to attract voters they are going to have to address issues of crime, unemployment and immigration.

"I wasn't particularly impressed with the (DNA's) candidates there were a couple that I thought would be good, but they didn't seem to have any depth," added Mr Galanis, a former senator and managing partner of chartered accounting firm Galanis, Horton & Co.

Still, Mr Galanis told The Tribune he believes that the DNA may siphon votes from the two established parties due to voter dissatisfaction with the status quo.

"I think he will affect both the PLP's and FNM's votes (though) I think it's more likely that he is going to attract FNM votes. In looking at the people in the room the other night many of them appeared to be FNMs.

"As a former FNM candidate and junior minister that would be his natural base but in all fairness there are a lot undecided people who are looking for change and who would welcome change if they think it will (shift) the established order," Mr Galanis added.

Officials in the Free National Movement and the Opposition Progressive Liberal Party have dismissed the chance that a third party can wrestle power from the two political parties, who have governed intermittently for decades.

However Mr Galanis said other countries with the Westminster system have seen impressive challenges to the dominant two-party system, a feat he thinks can be duplicated in this country. "I will not downplay the potential impact an alternative party can have particularly today when you consider the disaffection from and disappointment in the two mainstream parties.

"People are tired of the status quo, everywhere around the world in the Westminster Parliamentary model changes are taking place and alternative party models are making their presence felt in England, Australian and close at home in Trinidad and Tobago we saw the established parties significantly challenged in their recent elections.

"Third parties are making their presence felt around the world," said Mr Galanis.

May 16, 2011

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

It would be miraculous if Branville McCartney’s Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party won the next general election

Third party political influence

thenassauguardian editorial




Branville McCartney is set to unveil his Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party tomorrow night. McCartney is taking the leap and challenging the two main parties at the next general election. At this stage, despite claims by unnamed sources via the media, it is unclear if McCartney will field a full slate of candidates or if he will focus his attempt on competitive swing seats.

It would be miraculous if McCartney’s party won the next election. A victory for the DNA would be winning three to six seats. Such a victory would establish the organization as a real party. If McCartney wins his seat and is the only DNA member in the House of Assembly, that should still be considered a victory of sorts for the fledgling party.

But even if Bran and his candidates all lose the constituency races they enter, they can still influence the election another way.

Thus far, the two main political parties have not released manifestos. We do not know what their plans are for the mandate they seek. If McCartney comes out tomorrow or soon after with a manifesto with ideas on how to tackle the major problems facing the country, and these ideas are sensible, he could force the major parties to also take a stand on these issues.

For example, it seems as if there are more illegal number houses in New Providence that food stores. Thus far, the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Free National Movement (FNM) have ignored the issue. Over the last few years the number bosses have come out of the shadows. They have logos on their businesses, they advertise and one has even made a public donation to a government agency.

Clearly a final solution to this issue is needed. If Bahamians want to gamble, then gambling should be legalized. If it is determined that gambling will remain illegal, the number houses should be shut down. The FNM promises a referendum on the issue if elected. The PLP has no comment on the controversial issue thus far. To put it simply: neither has a position.

This is not leadership.

Crime is another issue. In fact, it is likely the major issue of concern for Bahamians. Yet, both major parties say crime is not a political issue. That is a stupid conclusion. All major issues facing a people are political. Governments are elected to address the problems of the time. If a party has no ideas regarding the major issue of concern for a people it should not offer itself as a potential government.

As we have mentioned before, McCartney must be patient if he is serious about creating a party that one day could win an election.

The PLP was formed in 1953 mostly by a group of white and light-skinned black Bahamians. The party was taken over by others and rebranded as a black nationalist party. That PLP finally won a general election, under the electoral rules of the day, in 1967.

The FNM was formed in 1971. It battled the PLP for more than two decades before finally winning a general election in 1992.

McCartney may fail this time, and he may fail miserably. If he is truly concerned about The Bahamas, and is not just pursuing vain ambition, he should use this campaign to demonstrate that he has solutions to the major problems facing Bahamians.

Such a campaign should force the major parties to also take clear actionable positions on major issues too. In the political marketplace of The Bahamas there is a duopoly. A serious third option could cause there to be competition in the marketplace of ideas. This is needed. Bahamians want to know what will be done about the shantytown problem that particularly affects New Providence and Abaco. We do not just want to hear, “Well, that’s just the way it is and always will be.”

It is all but certain that the PLP or FNM will form the next government of The Bahamas. The problem is that both parties have become stale and unimaginative. A little provocation by a third party would be a good thing. Hopefully it would make the parties focus on transformative governance again rather than maintaining the status quo.

5/11/2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Bahamas Blog International

Branville McCartney and his Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party will have a lot of competition this election season...

Politicians Dismiss DNA

By ROGAN SMITH
jonesbahamas



After Bamboo Town MP Branville McCartney quit the Free National Movement (FNM) he had one goal in mind – forming a party to challenge both the FNM and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), but according to a politician whose organisation declined an invitation to join Mr. McCartney’s new party, he was not "equipped" to do so.

Omar Smith, along with Cassius Stuart, recently dissolved their party, the Bahamas Democratic Movement (BDM) to join the FNM. They took their members along with them.

The men, who served as deputy leader and leader respectively, had been in talks with Mr. McCartney after he quit the FNM several months ago to become an independent MP.

Mr. McCartney was also in talks with the leaders of several other third parties trying to woo them to join his party.

However, the Bahama Journal recently reported that many of those leaders did not take his party seriously.

Mr. Smith explained why he chose not to team up with Mr. McCartney.

"When Mr. McCartney asked to speak with us – and we were more than willing to speak to anyone who was interested in national development – at that time he came to us and he said that he wanted us to join him. At that time I don’t think he was equipped, he didn’t have an organisation and he hasn’t put out a philosophy of what he wants to do," Mr. Smith said.

"I was curious to find out. I asked him and he didn’t have [a philosophy]. All he represented to me is that he wanted to challenge the PLP and the FNM and that wasn’t enough information. So, I wish him well, as I wish any young person who wants to do what he believes in. I think I have a little bit more experience in third parties than he has, but I wish him well and I wish him luck."

Mr. Smith was a guest on the Love 97 talk show, Issues of the Day with host, Algernon Allen yesterday.

When the BDM set out more than a decade ago, it sought to become a viable alternative to the two major political parties. But, the party failed to make waves on the political scene.

In fact, it has contested three elections since it was formed, but has failed to win any seat.

"After we were unsuccessful in three elections [2002, 2007 and the 2010 by-election] and after going door to door in so many constituencies and having people say that they supported what we were doing . . . [we realised that] there’s a different dynamic at work here. Bahamians want to make sure that their vote counts," he said.

"If they are under the impression that your organisation does not have the possibility of winning, or they don’t think you have the possibility of winning that particular seat, they will make sure that their second option gets there."

He continued, "I can still remember going up to these houses where I know these families were once PLP or FNM and they [said they] supported what we were doing. But, when they got to the poll they would say ‘Omar, listen I support what you’re doing, believe me, we support you, but we got to make sure that they don’t come in, we’ve got to keep them out’."

Mr. McCartney and his party will have a lot of competition this election season as there are several other third parties vying for a chance to become the government.

Attorney Paul Moss, activist Rodney Moncur and former journalist Ali McIntosh all have their own political parties.

"I want to encourage all of those people who believe in a cause and believe in certain principles that they’d like see come to fruition to go out there and advocate and push, however, when you look at the lay of the land and look at the reality of Bahamian politics you will come to realise that it is very very difficult to make those inroads," Mr. Smith said.

"There are certain resources that must come to bear for you to have an opportunity to make that leap into parliament. While I wish them well, I think the reality is going to be something different."

During his talk show appearance, Mr. Smith was berated by a number of callers, who suggested he was a hypocrite for becoming a part of an organisation that he had heavily criticised for more than a decade.

The callers noted that Mr. Smith and the BDM were especially tough on FNM Leader and Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.

But, he said, "If I’m in opposition to you it’s not my job to point out your strengths even though sometimes I did give credit where credit was due. It is not my position to build you up. It’s not my position to say the things that you are doing [well] for the most part. It is my position to critique you and say what you are doing wrong and say how they should be done. That is the way the process works," he said.

Mr. Smith said the FNM has given him and several of the new members assurances that they would be considered for seats and positions within the party.

"There are members outside of Mr. Stuart and myself who are frontrunners for constituencies for the next election. There’s a process within the organisation and I’m familiarising myself with the process and the members of our organisation have been received so well by the FNM and the branches," he said.

Mr. Smith says he is already campaigning.

May 4th, 2011

jonesbahamas

Bahamas Blog International

Branville McCartney has reportedly turned down offers to join other political parties... instead opting to form his own – the Democratic National Alliance (DNA)

PLP Stalled For McCartney

By ROGAN SMITH
jonesbahamas



The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) was so determined to get Bamboo Town MP Branville McCartney to join its ranks that it held off on appointing a candidate to run in the constituency against him, according to party leader Perry Christie.

When Mr. McCartney resigned as state minister for immigration last year Mr. Christie immediately sprung into action to let him know that the party was interested in having him come on board.

A year later when he resigned from the Free National Movement (FNM) Mr. Christie again let Mr. McCartney know that the party was a "big tent" always in search of new talent.

But, in both instances Mr. McCartney declined the offers.

So, Mr. Christie moved on.

Now, the PLP leader said to date four people have applied to the PLP to run in the constituency.

"Quite frankly the delay in appointing a candidate to Bamboo Town was because we wanted to give certain political personalities an opportunity to determine whether they would wish to become a PLP," Mr. Christie said.

"So, we have finished that course now and are moving on to name a candidate for those seats that are remaining. I expect in a short period of time moving forward that we would have a candidate named, but the delay was occasioned by my wanting to give some people whose names I will not now call an opportunity to determine whether they wanted to be a PLP or something else."

Mr. McCartney has reportedly turned down offers to join other third parties, instead opting to form his own – the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), which is set to launch next Monday.

"I support the right of Branville McCartney and others to form themselves into political organisations," Mr. Christie said.

"Branville McCartney’s difficulty is that (attorney) Paul Moss just announced a new political party and said that he has 23 candidates already, so clearly the scramble is on."

Mr. Christie said he believes most people will have to make a decision on which of the parties can realistically form a government.

As far as he is concerned, that choice will come down to two parties – the FNM and the PLP.

"I believe people would say that they want to give the PLP an opportunity because I believe they’re going to buy into and [realise] that Bahamians have to be meaningfully involved in the economy," he said.

FNM Leader Hubert Ingraham has, too, predicted that his party would once again represent Bamboo Town.

He recently went into the constituency to apologise to constituents for Mr. McCartney "abandoning" them.

April 28th, 2011

jonesbahamas

Bahamas Blog International

The Public Domain poll reveals that 47 percent of the people contacted were either somewhat dissatisfied of very dissatisfied with the Ingraham adminstration

Poll: Nearly half of electorate uninterested in PLP and FNM


By KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com


The latest Public Domain poll has revealed that nearly half of Bahamians surveyed are not satisfied with the current government, nearly half do not want to vote for either of the two main political parties and there is a significant portion of the electorate considering a third party.
According to the poll, 47 percent of the 402 people contacted said they were either somewhat dissatisfied of very dissatisfied with the Ingraham adminstration.

Public Domain, a new Bahamian market research firm, conducted the telephone survey between February 16 and March 11 with Bahamians across the country. Public Domain president M’wale Rahming said yesterday that the sample size has a maximal margin of error of 4.9 percent.

According to the poll, 28 percent of respondents said if an election were called today they would vote for the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP); 25 percent said they would vote for the Free National Movement (FNM); 26 percent were undecided; and 21 percent said they are unhappy with both parties and would consider a third party.

“A winning strategy for the major parties would be to secure a coalition and convince third party-minded and undecided voters to support the party,” Public Domain said in the report released yesterday to the media.

When respondents were asked the likelihood of them voting for a third political party that presented a full slate of candidates, with a mix of veteran and new candidates, 32 percent of those polled said they would very likely vote for such a group. Another 25 percent said they would be somewhat likely; 11 percent said they would be not very likely; 21 percent said not likely at all; and 11 percent of respondents were unsure.

Public Domain, however, said respondents who said they would vote for an unbranded third party should not automatically be considered third party supporters.

“Third party voters should be considered disaffected voters. They are unhappy with both parties. Their identified third party affiliation does not mean they have or will vote for a third party,” said Public Domain.

The polling results were released as at least one third party prepares to roll out its slate of candidates.

Former Free National Movement (FNM) Cabinet minister Branville McCartney has formed the Democratic National Alliance (DNA). The Nassau Guardian understands that the party already has a constitution and it is preparing to register with the Parliamentary Registration Department. A DNA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the party plans to run candidates in all 41 constituencies in the upcoming general election and it is almost done vetting about 20 candidates.

Public opinion on whether a third party would be viable has been split over the past weeks.

Rahming said their sample and data is much more accurate than a street poll, as a wider sample is captured through their automated call center.

According to Public Domain, the data was weighted by region, age and gender in order to represent the Bahamian adult population.

Rahming added that the sample is randomly taken from New Providence, Grand Bahama, Abaco and other islands.

The public opinion poll was conducted from Public Domain’s call center in New Providence, which is equipped with the latest computer assisted telephone interviewing technology, Rahming said.

4/14/2011

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

With the country well on pace to set its fourth homicide record in five years, it would be useful if the political parties would published crime manifestos...

Parties must elevate level of public debate

thenassauguardian editorial


As we make the march towards the next general election the major political parties are engaging in the usual back and forth debates. One side attacks and the other responds with a defense and counterattack.

On Sunday the Free National Movement (FNM) went straight at Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Leader Perry Christie.

“Mr. Christie is overflowing with theatrical passion, endless talk and promises rarely fulfilled,” said the governing party in its statement.

The FNM went on arguing that Christie is too indecisive to be re-elected prime minister.

The PLP responded and it attacked Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.

“Mr. Ingraham prefers to employ foreign workers to build roads that Bahamians can build. He employs a foreigner wherever he can. Those are the facts. The private sector has now climbed onboard and Brent Symonette is their ‘boy’. He is not our immigration minister he is the immigration minister of foreign special interests,” said the PLP.

Political banter between the parties can be entertaining at times. When written well, you can get a laugh out of the statements released. But during this election period, with so many serious issues facing the country, the parties should attempt to engage on points of policy rather than mere personal attack.

And the one area they should both focus on is crime.

With the country well on pace to set its fourth homicide record in five years it would be useful if the parties published crime manifestos – separate from the general manifesto to be published – in the run up to the general election.

A solution has to be arrived at regarding the poor state of prosecutions in the country.

Police Sergeant Chaswell Hanna published yet another comprehensive study on the homicide problem in The Bahamas – “Reducing murders in The Bahamas: A strategic plan based on empirical research.” The book is free on the Royal Bahamas Police Force’s website and it should be read by all serious current or future policymakers.

According to data in Hanna’s study, over the five-year period between 2005 and 2009 349 murders were recorded and there were only 10 murder convictions. People are getting away with murder.

The parties need to come up with solutions to this problem. We may need more prosecutors in the Office of the Attorney General (OAG); we may need better prosecutors in the OAG; we may need more investigators at the Central Detective Unit (CDU); we may need to bring back retired distinguished detectives to work as consultants with current detective to help improve the quality of police investigations.

It would help if the parties debated these issues in the public sphere this election season. What is shaping up is the same campaign we saw in 2007. The FNM says Christie is weak and the PLP spends its time responding to FNM attacks.

That campaign was not interesting the last time it happened.

4/13/2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Bahamas Blog International

The likelihood of Branville McCartney surviving this political slaughter is slim...

“McCartney’s New Party Unlikely”

By ROGAN SMITH



It seems Branville McCartney is going to have a tough job convincing candidates to join the political party he’s trying to form as some of the people he’s attempting to court think of it as "a joke" and not a viable alternative to the two major political parties.

Some of the people who attended Mr. McCartney’s meeting Tuesday night said the Bamboo Town MP is clearly "out of his element."

According to a well-placed source close to discussions, Mr. McCartney, who invited 100 people to his home to discuss the new party, just does not seem to know what he is doing.

"The likelihood of him surviving this political slaughter is slim," the source said.

Mr. McCartney reportedly wants the leaders of two third parties – the Bahamas Democratic Movement (BDM) and the National Development Party (NDP) – to dissolve their organisations and choose a leader democratically.

According the source, those leaders are not even considering such a request.

The Journal understands that the NDP took exception to the request and it remains a "sore spot."

A local newspaper recently reported that Mr. McCartney had raised as much as $25 million to fund his new party. However, the source says that is "pure nonsense."

"Bran has no funding. He says people have agreed to help him if he is able to get commitments. They’re telling him ‘if you form this party we’ll give you the money.’ Bran says he wants to raise $25 million, which is a long stretch. The other parties aren’t even raising that amount," said the source, who agreed to the Journal’s interview on condition of anonymity.

"Branville doesn’t have the money. The major issue at the meeting was fundraising. There were also a lot of arguments going back and forth with people pontificating during the meeting. There was a lot of flowery talk, but nothing of substance. The meeting was full of chaos and confusion. It really just became a social hangout."

The source said to make matters worse, Mr. McCartney is courting a lot of "reject people."

"He is flocking towards candidates who I’m sure even the third parties would reject. Some of these people have very little chance of making a mark on the political scenery," he said.

Even more frustrating, the source says, is the fact that the former cabinet minister is expecting potential candidates to follow him, even though he does not have much political experience.

"Why should these people leave the parties they are with to join up with Bran? He’s someone who has never articulated any vision for the country. What has he done? The only thing he did was resign from Hubert Ingraham’s cabinet and later Hubert Ingraham’s party," he said.

"Mr. McCartney could not even complete his full term as a junior minister. Why would anyone follow his lead? He’s great at marketing himself. He’s great at public relations, but leadership, I don’t think so."

The source said many people turned up to the meeting simply to see what Mr. McCartney is up to.

"A lot of them are going to war during this election. They wanted to know what he’s doing and who the key players are. But, it’s a joke," he said.

"Bran believes that because he’s in the House [of Assembly] and is a sitting MP that he has the upper hand. I’ll give him this; he’s very calculating. But, what he’s attempting now has been done before. I can’t follow a man who [isn’t] smarter than me."

He continued, "Mr. McCartney need only tap the shoulders of Dr. Bernard Nottage [Bain and Grants Town MP] and ask him how it worked out for him when he left the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) to form his own party. The Coalition for Democratic Reform didn’t fare well, and that’s with a leader who was a political heavyweight."

The Journal understands that a union president, a former talk show host and several other politicians attended Mr. McCartney’s meeting.

"When you’re putting together a party, you have to dissect the candidates and decide who to run. When you pick just anyone the quality of your party deteriorates. Ask any fisherman fishing with a net, when you cast your net, you not only pull up grouper, you also pull up goggle eye fish, seaweed and some rocks – things you can’t use. The point I’m seeking to make is that Bran is courting candidates he can’t use politically," the source said.

Another well-placed source, who requested anonymity, said he does not think that Mr. McCartney will hold on to his constituency. He said he believes the majority of voters will elect a PLP or Free National Movement (FNM) candidate.

"Some people are excited about Bran, but quite frankly he’s going to get demolished at the polls. I’m concerned whether his party will survive after this upcoming election. If he loses tomorrow, I can guarantee you that he’s not going to stick in there. He has no stickability, his quitting as state minister and later the FNM, proved that. When things aren’t going his way, he’s out of there and he lacks courage," he said.

"Look at what he did in the House when the first vote on BTC came up. He was nowhere to be found. A true leader would’ve sat behind Mr. Ingraham and voted ‘no’ on the issue. Be a man. Then, he’s too wishy-washy. He says he respects Mr. Ingraham’s leadership, but felt stifled, then he comes up with some other excuse to try and preserve his political career. Which is it?"

The source said the true test will be what happens after the election.

March 31st, 2011

jonesbahamas

Bahamas Blog International

Voting is an important part of the democratic process... However, voting should not be confused with democracy

Does it matter if you vote?

thenassauguardian editorial



Interesting debates always emerge when the question is posed as to whether or not citizens living in democracies should feel obligated to vote.

Most democracies were fought for. People who campaigned for freedom, self-governance and civil rights were jailed, some were murdered, some were beaten and many others were victimized. Some of these fights were actual wars.

In this context, we all should take the vote seriously. It is not a right, but a gift fought for by those who came before us.

As we all sit and evaluate the political parties and independent candidates who will offer for public office in the run-up to the next general election, we should make every effort to determine if there is someone on the ballot good enough to vote for.

Those who do not think there is anyone good enough to vote for should consider entering the race or the political process.

But if the ballot is filled with poor candidates, what should a voter do? Should voters feel compelled to vote?

No, they should not. Voting is an important part of the democratic process. However, voting should not be confused with democracy. Democracy is about self-governance. As citizens, we have a responsibility to do this everyday – not just every five years.

By working at a charity, providing assistance to the homeless, democracy is at work; by volunteering as a mentor at a school, democracy is at work; by raising an educated, hardworking law-abiding citizen, democracy is at work.

So for those who think there is no reasonable offering to vote for at the next general election, you should rest assured that there are many other ways to participate in the advancement and governance of The Bahamas.

A group of residents in a community can easily come together, approach their public school, and start an after school literacy program for the children falling behind, for example.

Simple initiatives such as these, if done by many individuals or by many groups, can do much to change the lives of the disadvantaged and the soon-to-be lost.

Elections are important; voting is important. But if you think the mainstream political parties are pathetic and the independents are incompetent, do not distress. You can exercise your democratic power everyday by doing something to help build the community.

3/30/2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Bahamas Blog International

Exactly what do we know about Mr. Branville McCartney so far?

The enigma known as Branville McCartney

By Rick Lowe


Mr. McCartney recently resigned from the government, (as he should have), remaining in Parliament as an independent MP, and rumour has it he will start a new political party to contest the next general election.

Upon hearing this, one of my nephews e-mailed from Abaco to say how exciting this was and felt this new party would win if they could field some good candidates.

My response, after consulting my political crystal ball, was that he might not even win the Constituency he currently represents, (Bamboo Town) again, much less the government based on what we know about him and his policies and how he proposes to implement them to date.

Exactly what do we know about Mr. McCartney so far?

1. He thinks illegal Haitians should be repatriated.
2. He thinks Bahamians should be able to succeed.
3. He is opposed to Cable & Wireless buying BTC.

Now what do we find when we look at what the FNM and PLP think about these things?

Believe it or not, Mr. McCartney, or "Bran" as he is affectionately known, agrees with both the major political parties on the first two points, and agrees with the PLP on the third, since they changed their position on privatisation that is. So what's he got that the other two parties don't have?  Problem is we don't know yet.

Until Mr. McCartney releases a position paper on major issues and how he will "plan or fix" things so Bahamians can get to know him, he stands for nothing original at this point. In fact he just might be so nationalistic that he sets the country back even further than the "devils" we know.

This quote from Nobel Laureate and economist, F.A. Hayek from his masterpiece, The Road to Serfdom, seems appropriate:

"The effect of the people's agreeing that there must be central planning, without agreeing on the ends, will be rather as if a group of people were to commit themselves to take a journey together without agreeing where they want to go; with the result that they may all have to make a journey which most of them do not want at all."

In the mean time it will be fun watching the political posturing until his cards are played for all to see, because at this point Mr. McCartney is little more than an enigma.

Monday, March 28, 2011

weblogbahamas

Bahamas Blog International

Branville McCartney support in the Free National Movement (FNM) has collapsed

What was Branville McCartney thinking?
thenassauguardian national review



The headline for this piece is the question that just about everyone has been asking since McCartney made the now famous statement — that Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham has no compassion.

McCartney, a sitting FNM MP who has made no secret of his leadership aspirations, made the startling statement last week Tuesday during an appearance on Star 106.5 FM’s talk show, “Jeffrey”, hosted by Jeff Lloyd.

This is exactly what McCartney told Lloyd: “At this stage, I’d certainly want [the FNM] to succeed, but we have our challenges. We seem to not be connected to the people, from the leader straight down. [We’re] showing a lack of compassion and not listening to the people.

“Although, yes we’re the ones who were put here to make decisions, the people are the ones who put us here. We need to listen. We don’t have all of the answers but the way we go about things, it’s not good. We have a number of new voters and even old supporters are concerned. I hope we get our act together.”

When asked if he was referring to a particular personality within the party, McCartney said Ingraham has to take responsibility for the challenges the party faces going into the next election.

“The prime minister is the leader of the FNM. The buck stops with the prime minister. Yes, there’s a lack of compassion — probably not intentionally. Perhaps that’s just the way he is. That type of governance was necessary in 1992. In 2011 and 2012, I don’t think it is.”

For anyone who doubted the statement or its context reported exclusively by The Nassau Guardian on Wednesday, McCartney repeated his feelings about the Prime Minister and the state of the Free National Movement during an interview with NB12 TV news later that night.

The statement drew a strong response from the public, much like his decision to resign from Ingraham’s Cabinet after serving just under two years as a junior minister in the ministries of tourism and immigration. McCartney thought he was being “underutilized”.

Now a new round of questions surrounding McCartney’s political strategy and his political future hang heavily over the relative newcomer to politics.

Is this the final chapter in McCartney’s political career? Maybe not, but the young politician does not appear to be making any friends in the FNM.

“His (McCartney’s) support in the party has collapsed,” said a well-placed source within the FNM who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak on behalf of the party. “Any residual support he had has collapsed.

“You can’t keep going around lacerating the Prime Minister and the FNM for all the wrong things they are doing, but then say, ‘I support the party’. “It doesn’t make sense.”

PARTY VS. PUBLIC SUPPORT

Those outside the FNM seem similarly confused.

“If Branville is listening to people out there who may be clamoring for him to be the leader of the FNM, the question is are they people who can vote for him at convention. If not, he ought to recognize that it’s not meaningful support,” said Raynard Rigby, a former chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party.

“If he has support within the FNM he ought to figure out and think through how his open criticism of the leader will factor into the minds of his supporters. You can be popular in the eyes of the public, but party support is what matters if you are interested in a leadership position, and you saw that in the deputy leadership race in the PLP. Obie Wilchcombe was seen as more popular but Brave (Davis) beat him convincingly because he had the support of the party.”

George Smith, a veteran politician who served in the Sir Lynden Pindling administration, suggests that McCartney has failed to do just that — think things through, at least when it came to last week’s statement.

“The statement probably reflects what he is thinking, but he obviously did not weigh it carefully. In politics when you say something that makes you appear bold and courageous you may have to pay a price,” said Smith.

Only time will tell what that price will be, but there are already the obvious suggestions that McCartney may not receive the FNM nomination to run in Bamboo Town as a result of the “no compassion” remark.

“Make no mistake, FNMs have their own problems with Hubert Ingraham, but the party does not like these attacks which are seen as extremely disloyal to the party,” said the FNM source. “He is providing attack lines to the opposition. That’s a serious thing.”

McCartney has said that if he does not get the nomination he would run as an independent or “otherwise”. That “otherwise” is unlikely to be the PLP, given the boost an independent McCartney in Bamboo Town would give to the chances of the opposition winning that seat.

POLITICAL EXPERIENCE

Independents, generally, fare very poorly in general elections in The Bahamas, unless they receive the support of a political party that may decide not to run anyone in that seat.

While there have been success stories, such as Perry Christie and Hubert Ingraham (Tennyson Wells and Pierre Dupuch to a lesser extent), those men had years and years of experience in office and serving in Cabinet before turning independent, and had been battle-tested.

McCartney has neither the wealth of experience nor the political battle wounds to carry him through the trials of the “political wilderness”, and cast him as a maverick independent.

But what McCartney does appear to have is a certain appeal to a segment of the public that is hungry for a new face to lead the country. “Sick of Ingraham and Scared of Christie” is becoming a mantra among many young professional Bahamians who are openly declaring their intentions of sitting out the next general election.

McCartney is a successful lawyer and a seemingly dedicated and conscientious MP. He has a certain talent for public relations and is good at using technology and social media to connect with young voters. And whatever his critics may say, he is not afraid to publically criticize the government or his party, which in some quarters has been interpreted as ambitious and courageous.

McCartney has also taken a tough stance on two hot button issues in the country — illegal immigration and crime — and while everyone has not always agreed with his approach, his decision to publically state his positions has been generally well-received by the public.

Whether McCartney decides to bide his time in the FNM — although that seems unlikely in light of his recent statements — or become an independent, the road ahead will not be easy.

“When you are in Cabinet you have a level of public persona associated with the position. In the back bench you have to continually redefine who you are politically to maintain a public presence,” said Rigby.

This is a point obviously not lost on McCartney, who since resigning from Cabinet has made a number of headlines, more recently for showing up at a BTC unions anti-privatization rally, and telling reporters that he was undecided on an issue that his party obviously supports.

But if McCartney is to succeed in one of the mainstream political parties, he will have to work on how his actions and statements are being interpreted by those who make the decisions in those parties — the more experienced politicians who in this political climate call the shots.

AMBITION OR ARROGANCE

What some have interpreted as ambition and courage, others have interpreted as arrogance and inexperience.

“If he had said what he said in a way that people could better interpret he would have shown good political acumen, but by being so (publicly) honest he clearly has positioned himself in a way that the party has to deal with him,” said Smith, who emphasized that personally he is very fond of McCartney.

“Longevity is not on his side. He has not been around long enough. He’s a newcomer.

“He must have tremendous talent and personality which permits him to be effective, courteous, respectful and show that he has learned the game well enough and get people to say of him the many things he says of himself.”

A former politician who spent decades in frontline politics said of McCartney:

“He was in Cabinet for less than two years and then said he wanted to be leader or a substantive minister. It’s admirable to have ambition to go to the top but there’s a road, a protocol. Dion (Foulkes) and Tommy (Turnquest) came up through the party.

“I thought he was trying to do a good job in immigration, he made some errors but at least he was doing something. If he is able to control this particular situation he may survive but he has to get a handle on his public posturing.”

Among his colleagues, McCartney reportedly has little support.

“None of his Cabinet colleagues take him seriously. I don’t think he is seen as a contender. By resigning from Cabinet he removed himself as a contender for leadership,” said the FNM source.

McCartney was appointed to the Cabinet in his first term in office, took many by surprise when he decided to resign last year February.

According to his resignation letter: “The factors that motivated this run the full gamut of issues and emotions, some more compelling than others. In the forefront are my feelings of stagnation and the inability to fully utilize my political potential at this time.”

He went on to say: “It is also my belief that our current political system is headed in the wrong direction…I have already proven myself on many levels and have much to be proud of, but it would be wrong of me to assume that I have proven myself to you without demonstrating the strength and diversity of knowledge you deserve.”

An interview following that resignation only added to the confusion.

McCartney said that as a member of the Cabinet he was required to tow the party line, and thought he could do more outside of the Ingraham Cabinet, “speak out on what is right and not based on party lines”.

He said at the time: “There is no doubt that the prime minister, Hubert Alexander Ingraham, is the best man for the job at this time. He is no doubt the best leader that we have had in our party and he remains that way today… I respect him, I support him. He has my full, full support.”

McCartney said at the time that he had no intention of challenging Ingraham for the leadership of the party. But that line changed later that year when McCartney made it known that if the FNM held its convention that year he would offer himself for leader. The FNM decided not to hold the convention, citing financial and other reasons.

WASTED OPPORTUNITY

Some thought that the opportunity to serve in the Cabinet was a great training ground for anyone with leadership aspirations, even if you disliked the style or some of the decisions of the prime minister.

“He had a chance to make his mark but he left. It takes years to make change but he didn’t give himself a chance,” said the FNM source, who pointed out that Ingraham obviously saw potential in McCartney or else he would not have been appointed to the Cabinet in his first term in office.

Another criticism that has been leveled against McCartney is that he is not a team player, and had to be reminded that “Branville does not have a policy, the government has a policy”.

Some of his actions as junior minister in immigration were controversial and interpreted as grandstanding. Not only did it raise eyebrows in the country but warranted review by the prime minister.

“If he had remained in the cabinet, continued to perform and perform well, show that he was more politically savvy he would have had a good shot in serving in the leadership of the FNM,” said Rigby.

“His future may look dim today but that could change down the road. He must demonstrate that he is a man of conviction, at times it may be necessary to publicly criticize the party and leader but you have to be prepared to be an agent of change.”

2/7/2011

thenassauguardian national review

Bahamas Blog International

The issue of crime will dominate public discourse until Bahamians vote for a new government in 2012

The use of deadly force and the crime fight
thenassauguardian editorial


The political parties are piecing together crime platforms for the election campaign, which started when Hubert Ingraham announced on November 7 that he would seek a fourth term as prime minister. We hope they find advisors who can help them. The issue of crime will dominate public discourse until Bahamians vote for a new government. The public will need to hear solutions from both major parties, not just idle talk.

We advocate tough responses to those seeking to disturb the peace.

The Bahamas has drifted too far over the past three decades from being a peaceful set of islands to being islands racked with fear and anxiety. We will set a third homicide record in four years this year. And with no measures in place yet to stop the trend, it is likely there will be a fourth homicide record in five years come the end of 2011.

A part of the crime fight is improving the quality of police investigations, case management by prosecutors and increasing the number of criminal courts to hear cases. The government is working on all these measures.

Another equally significant part of the crime fight is the war on the streets.

Hardened hit men, armed robbers, rapists and armed home invaders exist in The Bahamas. They have destroyed the lives of so many Bahamians over the past few years. These crimes have led to much fear and anger. Honest Bahamians want someone, or some group, to push back in their defense.

Walden Mitchell, on Monday night, shot a police officer; several days before he had shot at and assaulted others. In an operation then led by the police to capture and arrest Walden Mitchell the police, in the course of their duty, shot and killed Walden Mitchell.

He reportedly sent a message to police that he was armed and ready.

In an editorial earlier this week we commended the police for doing their job. In doing their job Walden Mitchell was shot. We called on the police to just do their job. If as a consequence a criminal is shot, so be it. Some have misunderstood our position in this regard and we apologize for any misunderstanding. We are not calling for extra-judicial killings.

Section 103 of the Penal Code allows for the use of deadly force by citizens or law enforcement officers in the capture and detention of someone who has committed a felony.

Section 107 of the Penal Code authorizes the use of deadly force for the protection of self and others in connection with the following crimes: Treason, piracy, murder, manslaughter except manslaughter by negligence, robbery, burglary, housebreaking, arson of a dwelling house or vessel, rape, forcible unnatural crime and dangerous or grievous harm.

When criminals are on the streets of our islands armed with weapons with the intent to harm citizens, police have a legal responsibility to intervene. In this intervention the law allows officers to use deadly force. No right-thinking citizen should have a problem with this. It is the law.

When police use legally appropriate force against criminals, society usually applauds their effort. Complaints usually only arise when police are unnecessarily and inappropriately heavy-handed in carrying out their mandate. Police must protect citizens against those disturbing the peace.

The proper use of force by police has an effect. It lets criminals know that there is an immediate consequence to harming citizens. It lets criminals know that if you are riding around our neighborhoods armed and searching for an innocent mother to rob, or a hardworking father to molest, police are not afraid to apply the law to you.

The breakdown of the criminal justice system has had consequences in The Bahamas. Many fear the law less than they used to. The ongoing reforms hopefully will speed up the prosecution process so that once placed in the system, justice can be meted out in a timely fashion.

We just ask that criminals be found and dealt with appropriately according to due legal process.

The Bahamas is at a crossroad. Some do not seem to realize this. Either we return to being an orderly society or we become like some other societies and countries that have already gone too far.

11/26/2010

thenassauguardian editorial

Bahamas Blog Inernational