I want to thank
the government for presenting this mid-term budget and giving the Bahamian people
an opportunity to see the result of poor fiscal planning, hard headedness and
arrogance. They have given the Bahamian people an opportunity to see a
government that does not understand the basic tenets of our economy or how it
works. They have given the Bahamian people an opportunity to see a government
that has no clue, is visionless and has no plan to rescue its people from this
miserable life. The FNM is out of touch and running out of time.
Madam President
I will begin this
debate where I thought that the mover and seconder of this bill on the
government side in that other place and this place would have began. That is
with an honest assessment of the Standard and Poor’s report on the downgrading
our sovereign credit rating on December 23rd 2009.
It is obvious that
the FNM has either misinterpreted the report and they really don’t get it or
they have deliberately chosen to misrepresent it.
During the debate
the Minister of State for Finance and the Chairman of the FNM both stated that
the reason S&P downgraded the Bahamas was specifically due to increased
borrowing by the government to provide for social relief. They were referring
to the third paragraph in the report under the heading titled “Rational”:
“The higher debt levels reflect the
government's financing its rising
fiscal deficits, a result of
countercyclical fiscal spending against a drop in The Bahamas' already narrow
revenue base. Specifically, the government has increased capital and social
spending to mitigate the social impact of recession.
THE S&P
RATIONALE
The real reason
for the downgrading lies in the first and second paragraph. The first paragraph:
“The downgrade
reflects The Bahamas’ weakened fiscal profile. It’s debt and deficits have
increased, and the composition of its debt has weakened somewhat.
In addition, following three years of economic contraction, The Bahamas’ growth
prospects in 2011 are modest.”
The second
paragraph talks about the increase in the debt to GDP ratio and concludes:
“The
commonwealth’s share of external to locally issued debt is 20%, which is
relatively low but up from 10% in 2007.”
Essentially our
foreign currency debt has doubled in 2 years from 500 Million to now over a
billion dollars and really now represents 25% of our total debt.
The FNM was warned
about this as far back as June 2008. But they don’t listen they know it all.
This is what I said during the 2008 budget debate.
“Another point of
interest when looking at the national debt is keeping a close eye on the
portion which makes up the foreign currency part on the debt. When the PLP took
office in 2002 the foreign currency debt was 525 million dollars or 23.6% of
the National debt which stood at 2.224 billion dollars. In 2007 when we left
office the foreign currency part of our debt was reduced to 430 million dollars
or 15% of our National debt of 2.889 billion. The FNM government has already
borrowed 100 million in US dollars since coming to office to boost our foreign
reserves so our foreign currency debt has increased over 500 million dollars
again. This is something we must keep a close eye on as our foreign currency
debt is directly linked to the strength of our dollar.”
Madam President
On the topic
of debt, The FNM government has the distinction of being in office to bring in
the 1 billion dollar debt mark, the 2 billion dollar debt mark, the 3 billion
dollar debt mark and now the 4 billion dollar debt mark. In 1991 before the FNM
came to office in their first term the national debt was 870 million. That’s
right.
That’s why I laugh
when I hear them blaming everything on the PLP. The Pindling administration
built every institution in this country prior to 1992 for under 1 billion
dollars.
The fact is that
when this term is finished in 2012, the FNM would have been in government for
15 of the last 20 years. Who do you think we should be blaming for the mess we
are in. We met a mess in 2002, we cleaned it up and now we are in worst
situation we have ever been in. Look at the economy, our outlandish debt, crime
social ills, health care and education. You think the Bahamian people don’t
know the FNM is largely responsible for this mess. Think again.
Madam President
Back to the
S&P report. I now turn to the heading in the report called “Outlook”. This
is really the most important part because it tells the government whether or
not our credit rating is likely to come under further pressure and what needs
to be done to avoid that.
“The stable
outlook reflects Standards &Poor’s expectation of a gradual tightening of
the government’s fiscal stance and generally stable external financing
profile.”
It simple terms
this means for Goodness sake slow down the borrowing and whatever you do, do
not borrow foreign currency.
It goes on:
The “Bahamas
tourism sector will likely improve only as the U.S economy recovers”. That
means no time soon.
“In the meantime
the government is working to put the offshore financial sector, a second
economic pillar, on a stronger footing after it was included on the G20/OECD
grey list of offshore financial centers.” This means with tourism on the ropes
if we don’t get our financial services into a lean mean fight machine, we maybe
on course for a one two punch and out for the count. Lights out...
That’s why we
raised the alarm last year during this debate about pressure on the financial
services industry. But they did not listen until it was too late.
In closing S&P
said this:
“The ratings could
come under downward pressure if The Bahamas’ fiscal deterioration persists and
the economic base erodes more severely.” The base is Tourism and financial
Services.
“Conversely, the
ratings could improve following a more proactive government policy response to
reduce debt levels or if the commonwealth’s economic prospectus strengthen”.
The truth is the FNM
government has no response no policy and no plan to improve the financial nightmare
they have led us into. They have stuck there head in the sand, exposed their
tail and they are hoping and praying for the best.
Their answer is to
compare us to other nations and say how well we are doing. See Carl’s statement
in the house.
The Debt was spent on Social
Relief.
Madam President
This is the
biggest joke. They have borrowed 1 billion in 3 years. Where did they borrow
one penny for social relief. I invite them, in fact I challenge them to show
where they borrowed one penny for social relief.
The budget
allocation for 2009/10 under heading 44 shows that the budget allocation for
2009/10 was unchanged from 2008/2009. Not even one extra cent in these hard
times. Of the 68 million dollars in these appropriation bills only 2 million is
for social relief, a meagre 3%.
Children are going
to bed hungry every night. Parents can’t pay light bill, school fees, mortgage,
rent. You have any idea the amount of homes that have no food on the shelves
and this government making sport of people saying they borrowing money for
social relief. They should hang their heads in shame. Shame on you.. Shame on
you..
The unemployment
scheme funds came from national insurance. The 6 month program hired 2500
persons at $175. That’s $11,375,000. What else is there? The education loan
guarantee program has been cancelled. What else is there? Thousands without a
job, thousands without light, What else is there? thousands without food,
thousands months and months in mortgage arrears, thousands coming out of
private school and health insurance
and thousands buckling under the financial strain of medical expenses,
what else is there?
NOT ONE RED
CENT OF A BILLION DOLLARS SPENT ON SOCIAL RELIEF.
Madam President
The revenue for
the first 6 months was $634,909,711(this includes the 62M one off income) and
the expenditure was $942,763,895. A deficit for the first 6months of this
year of a whopping 300 million dollars.
Interesting that
they have revised the estimates for the expenditures for the year 2009/10
upward 200M to 1.754 Billion dollars but have left the revenue projection
unchanged. On the face of it, it appears that our revenue projection will fall
short by about 200M to just under 1.2 Billion dollars and our expenditure will
be over 1.8 billion dollars for a total deficit of 650 million dollars by June
30th 2010. This is staggering. In this one year alone they will have
to borrow more than the PLP borrowed in 5 years.
A billion dollars
and we have nothing but roads and environmental disaster to show for it.
Saunders
Beach
Madam President
I now move on to
Saunders Beach. You will no doubt
be aware of the back and forth that has recently occurred in the media between
the Committee to Protect and Preserve The Bahamas for Future Generations, which
I chair, and the Minister for the Environment, Mr. Earl Deveaux.
Needless to say, I
think it is unfortunate that the Minister has attempted to reduced the
seriousness of the claim made by the Committee to what many would consider
petty politics by inferring that my motives are soley political, and that I may
be interested in running in the next General Election.
Madam President,
Let me state that,
when I first engaged the Prime Minster with regard to the movement of the
Container Port to Arawak Cay and the subsequent planned extension, Mr. Earl
Deveaux was then the Minister of Works, and I was not addressing him in any
form. Suddenly one day in response
to assertions and questions that I put to the Prime Minister, Mr. Deveaux
responded in the media. I was
surprised by this, but I assumed that the Prime Minister had instructed him “to
deal with me”.
Madam President,
Minister Deveaux
first claimed that I was against moving the Container Port to Arawak Cay
because I had some interest in a water plant which was to be located at Arawak Cay, and this was
made public by the Minister in the newspapers and on the internet. In response, I sent a copy of a 2005 article
that appeared in The Tribune and reminded the reporter that it was in fact
their newspaper that printed the story in 2005 stating that the Progressive
Liberal Party would not agree to any industrial development on Arawak Cay as it
had plans for it to be a cultural, residential and recreational center and that
it was likely that the water plant would be placed at Perpall Tract. The water plant never materialized and
that was that.
It was then
claimed that I wanted the plant to go to Clifton because my family were in the
trucking business and we were in some way to benefit from the long trucking
route that this new port at Clifton would create. I notified the public that our family had sold its interest
in the trucking business in early 2005 and hence we were no longer in the
trucking business and neither I nor any member of my family stood to gain
anything from the relocation or the container port whether in Arawak Cay or
Clifton.
Now, today, the
same Minister is alleging that I have some other political motivation. I understand that it is difficult for
him and others like him to accept that there are Bahamians who have a genuine
concern about their country and are motivated simply to do what we think is in
the best interest of our country.
I want to assure the Minister and others that I will not be
deterred. I am not intimidated and
I will continue to press on to reveal to the Bahamian public the truth as I
uncover it and to expose the secret deals made behind the closed doors and the
special interest group that are involved with the expansion of Arawak Cay.
Mr Deveaux
dishonest again
Madam President,
In an article on
Friday, 5th March, 2010 in The Tribune, Minister Deveaux in response
to a press release issued by the Committee said in the newspaper and I quote:-
“Mr. Deveaux argues that beach erosion has
occurred at several north facing beaches
on New Providence, paradise Island and Rose Island, which have taken a pounding from strong was due to the action of
extreme weather conditions.”
On Wednesday, he tabled in Parliament
fourteen photographs of battered beaches on paradise Island and Rose Island,
northeast of New Providence. He stated further:
“I categorically deny that that erosion at
Saunders Beach has anything to do with
the dredging of the harbour or extension of Arawak Cay. To
suggest that these occurrences are caused by anything other than the extreme weather conditions is
irresponsible. The only beaches that are not experiencing it are on the lee
side.”
Madame President,
When Minister
Deveaux talks about the lee side, he means the southern side of the Island and
he is stating that the beaches on the northern coast are the beaches being
affected. As a result, I took it
upon myself to visit nine beaches; Cabbage Beach on Paradise Island and eight
beaches on the northern coast of
New Providence which include Long Wharf, Saunders Beach, Goodman’s Bay,
Sandyport Beach, Delaporte Beach behind Poop Deck West, the beach just west of
Nesbitt’s on West Bay Street, Caves Village Beach and Orange Hill Beach.
Madam President,
I now table in
this place pictures of the said beaches and point out that I did visit Cabbage
Beach. The erosion which occurred is directly behind the Beach Towers Hotel. I
went and spoke with the bartenders at the beach bar where the erosion had
occurred and they confirmed that this erosion happens from time to time during
this time of the year. I am aware of this as I have seen erosion in this
particular spot on other occasions.
Madam President,
I also present
pictures of the other 95 percent of Cabbage Beach which shows absolutely no
erosion whatsoever. Of the eight
beaches that I visited on the northern coast of New Providence, I found that
seven of the eight beaches had absolutely no erosion whatsoever. In fact, one or two beaches had more
sand than normal, and at the beach near Nesbitt’s, the sand was flowing in the
road.
Madam President,
There was only one
beach that had major erosion and that beach was Saunders Beach. I would go so far as to say that it was
not only erosion but total destruction of Saunders Beach. I present three
pictures of Saunders Beach in July 2009 where you can see Bahamians enjoying a
lovely beach and you can see children playing on the beach and now that beach
is gone. I now present three
pictures of the present state of Saunders Beach which has been destroyed and is
worsening by the day. I can only say that I sincerely hope and pray that the
beach does return as it has been an area of recreation for so many Bahamians
for so many years.
So, Madam
President, I wanted to show that I have nothing personal against Mr. Deveaux
except that from the onset he has been dishonest with regard to the truth about
the extension of Arawak Cay, and he has misled the public having on many
occasions simply told untruths as he did last week Thursday in that other place with regard to beaches
on the northern shore. It is
further evidence that he cannot be trusted. He should be removed as Minister of the Environment and that
is why in this place I have called him the worst Minister of the Environment
the country has ever seen.
Re Earth
quotes Mr. Deveaux in 2000
Madam President,
I want to bring to
your attention also an article that I found dated February 29th,
2000 entitled “Bahamians Resent the Loss of Beaches to Luxury” just as a
background to show that the Minister really has not changed and continues to
put special interest ahead of his duty to protect the interest of the Bahamian
people. This article appeared on
the re Earth site during the time when this same FNM government was attempting
to put a residential development at Clifton Cay. I quote from it as follows:-
“The debate goes even deeper than the vanishing
public shoreline and is touching off
passions about the island’s identity and its future. Independent only since
1973, the Bahamas has had much new foreign development
in recent years, thanks to Mr. Ingraham.
Developments like Clifton Cay,
officials say, create jobs – a priority for the government.
‘That
is what our people needed for a better way of life and education,’ said Earl
Deveaux, the top environmental adviser to the prime minister. ‘What country is concerned about
preserving artifacts when it is scraping by for a living or for food?’
But Sam Duncombe,
a sometime advocate for environmental preservation, said the luxury
developments cater too much to outsiders without
regard to the needs of Bahamians like herself, who want to see the shoreline
preserved for future generations.
‘There is
a certain ilk of American who believes the world is their oyster,’ Ms Duncombe
said. ‘We resent it. To them it’s money. To us it’s who we are. It’s our peace of mind. It’s our soul….The idea of pirates
still exists,’ she said. ‘They no
longer have beards and long coats.’
She said then that
she saw some government officials as modern-day pirates. She was talking about
FNM government officials.
‘They are
selling us out,’ she said.”
Table document.
Madame President,
The “foreigners”
have now been replaced with Bahamians who are considered part of the “Old Boy’s
Club” and these are the same men who sat at the table in 2000 and attempted to
destroy our culture, heritage and history at Clifton Cay and they are now
destroying our environment at Saunders Beach, Vista Marina and the beaches
along Cable Beach. They are no
other than the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Hubert A. Ingraham, the Deputy
Prime Minister, Mr. Brent Symonette and the Minster for the Environment, Mr.
Earl Deveaux. They now believe
that The Bahamas is their “oyster” and they can do as they wish.
Senator Higgs, can
you believe that this is what your Minster of the Environment had to say about
your beloved Clifton Cay? If it
was left to him and the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, there would
be no Clifton Cay. These are
the sort of men putting their private, personal and specials interests ahead of
their duty to protect and preserve The Bahamas for future generations. They have not changed and are not fit
to lead.
The Bahamas
National Trust
Madam
President,
What I also find
very disturbing is the role the Bahamas National Trust has played in
facilitating and encouraging the destruction of our wetlands in Vista Marina
and also the destruction of the seabed and beach at Saunders Beach. It appears that the President of the
National Trust, Mr. Eric Carey, has now confused his duty at the National Trust
with that of the role of the Government and has been complicit in encouraging
the Government in the destruction of wetlands and the beach at Saunders
Beach. I want to lay on the table
a quote made by Mr. Eric Carey on 3rd September, 2009 on the
Facebook page of the “Save Saunders Beach” where he stated:-
“The loss of wetlands are regrettable – but
when their loss cannot be prevented in the interest of national capital works
or private developments then we
seek mitigation. The mitigation
for the loss of wetlands in the road
improvement programme is the restoration of Big Pond and the creation of a public park there.”
Madam
President,
What concerned me and
other bloggers on the site is the part where he said “we seek mitigation”. It almost sounds like he is speaking
for the Government. Who are the
“we” that he is referring to?
It was always my
understanding that the National Trust was there to protect and preserve the
environment and to speak up against any and all destruction to
our environment, but it appears that the million dollar that the FNM Government
gives to the National Trust annually by way of subvention has not only bought
their silence, but also their support for any environmental destruction the
Government decides to do to our beloved Bahamas. I cry shame on Mr. Carey
for being so closely tied to the FNM Government on this matter, and I cry shame
on the Bahamas National Trust for not reminding Mr. Carey that his duty is to
the National Trust and the protection of the environment and not to the FNM
Government or any Government for that matter.
Madame President,
Before closing, I
want to rest on the table the photographs of baby turtles crossing the street
on Saunders Beach in front of the Shell Gas Station. I have here photos of persons in the road picking up the
turtles and placing them back in the water at Saunders Beach. I am told that two SUVs had to park
at both ends of the road in front
of the Shell Gas Station to stop cars from passing as turtles were being
crushed under their tires. You can see from the pictures the size of the
turtles is smaller than the size of your palm, and I am told that they are in
fact baby loggerheads.
Madam President,
I raised this
issue in the public and in this place when it arose and I was shocked and
amazed that it was not given any attention whatsoever. In fact, the spokesperson for the
National Trust, whose name I do not recall, appeared on the evening news
stating that it was impossible for this to occur and that there must be some
mistake and that it did not happen.
The environmentalists said not a single word. On Facebook, I received a
message from a person at the Ministry of
Fisheries and they said they would investigate it. I sent them the details and the pictures
and invited them to go and talk to the staff at the Shell Gas Station but
nothing. It appears, Madam
President, that the environmentalists in this country only know how to speak up
when the PLP is in power and when the FNM is in power they go silent. It is unfortunate but this has now
become the clear perception, and myself and many Bahamians are saddened by
this.
The Five
types of politician
Madame President,
In closing I want
to refer to a sermon given earlier this year by Father James Moultrie, the Rector
of St. Matthew’s, where I am a member. Father Moultrie spoke about the five
types of Christians and I will mention them here and it made me reflect and
create the “five types of politicians”. I want us to not only think about what
type of Christians we are, but also as politicians to consider what category of
politician we fall in.
The five
types of Christians
1. The Christians by name only
2. The Christians by habit only – go to church
3. The devoted Christian- devoted but something is missing
4. The practical
Christian, grasped the heart of the book and concerned about other people and
not ashamed to be called Christian
5. Genuine
Christian deeply spiritual.
In meeting them you felt you were meeting Christ himself.
The five
types of politician
1.The politician
by name only. You have
no idea what he is doing and he cannot account for anything he has done. Up and
down in the road driving the government car suit on. Constituents can’t see him
or her.
2. The politician
by habit only. Turns up to work every day, comes to the House/Senate but cannot
show that they accomplished anything
3. The devoted politician. Something
is missing turns up to work and actually works, but has no plan, no clarity of purpose.
They running round like chicken without head. Means well but does not get it.
4. The practical
politician. Concerned, they get it, they visit their constituency – they address
their needs, they fight for them in Parliament, They have a plan to assist them
and the country.
5. The genuine
politician. Selfless, there to serve – puts their duty and interest of country
ahead of self and special interest. In their presence you know they genuinely
care and there to serve.
Madam President,
Father Moultrie
closed by saying:
“At the root of
the innumerable wrongs in our world is the discrepancy between word and
deed. It is the weakness of
churches, parties and persons.
This was the chief fault Jesus found with the Pharisees, “They do not practice what they
preach.” We have to live the
Gospel. As St, Augustine said
“Preach the Gospel and sometimes use words.” Mahatma Ghandi once said “My life is my message.” And so it was with Jesus. And as it
should be with us.
And I close by
saying the problem with the FNM is that there is great discrepancy between
their words and deeds. Trust, transparency and accountability… I give you, CLICO,
the container port at Arawak Cay, Saunders Beach, the many unanswered questions
on the table in this place and the other. “They do not practice what they
preach”.
I encourage all of
us to strive to be the genuine Christian and politician so that while we are in
this place our life would be our message and legacy.
