Nassau, Bahamas - The governing Free National Movement’s (FNM) convention was a disappointment to all Bahamians who were eagerly awaiting the articulation of a visionary plan for how the Ingraham administration is priming our economy to emerge out of this recession stronger than we entered into it.

Instead of hearing about what concrete steps are being undertaken to create a new, diversified economy that extends beyond vacation tourism, financial services and land sales, we heard a regurgitation of what The Bahamas was like prior to 1992; what was done by the Ingraham administration between 1992 and 2002; and what the Christie administration did or did not do between 2002 and 2007. The decisions being made today at the Cabinet level of governance are entirely being made by the governing Ingraham administration. The FNM’s strategy of deflecting focus away from what the Ingraham cabinet is doing, or not doing, by asking people to imagine how much worse things would be if it were a Christie-led cabinet is an absolute cop-out, pure and simple.

What is the Ingraham administration doing today to create a new economy and to protect and empower the Bahamian people? This is what we expected to hear, but never heard at the FNM’s convention on the issues of the economy, crime, land reform and the freedom of information act.

The Economy:

There were no concrete plans for creating a new economic model that will prime our economy to become more diversified and thereby minimize our heavy dependence on vacation tourism. The economic policy of borrowing for infrastructure spending and social welfare programs, as outlined by both the Minister of State and Minister of Finance are neither innovative, nor stimulative. They simply suggest a policy of deficit spending to pick-up the slack until the tourism industry rebounds. Constructing roads and government buildings creates temporary jobs. This is not economic stimulus; this is economic relief. Unless tourism rebounds fully, or unless new industries are developed that will absorb these temporary workers when these infrastructural projects are completed, then they will once again be among the unemployed seeking unemployment benefits.  

There was no talk of any concrete plans to be implemented in the next 6 months to diversify the economy through efforts to launch new industries such as fish farming and processing; medical research and tourism; or any other industry that could be developed by making it more attractive for banks to reinvest loan profits in business projects that would facilitate the growth of these types of industries, rather than wholly repatriating them to enrich foreign jurisdictions. A Bank Reinvestment Act as proposed by our party, whereby a percentage of bank profits are set aside for reinvestment in new loans earmarked for these critical development sectors, would stimulate the emergence of these new industries.   

Moody’s October economic report for The Bahamas cites the country’s lack of economic diversification as being a major threat to the country’s ability to withstand external shocks. It stated that tourist arrivals have been falling since 2005, predating this current crisis. Many in the tourism business will tell you that visitors constantly complain that there is very little for them to do in Nassau and Freeport. Yet the Minister of Tourism and Aviation, The Hon. Vincent Vanderpool-Wallace, and others tout efforts to dredge the Nassau Harbour and increase the airlift to Grand Bahama. What is being done to give them something to do once they get here Mr. Minister?

The FNM continued to boast at their convention of the $60 million being spent to dredge the harbour for Genesis Class cruise ships that have more to do and sell on board than any class of cruise ship ever in service. We know that cruise ship passengers to The Bahamas, on cruise ships that offered far less on-board amenities, only spend an average of $50 per person when they come ashore. This administration’s policy of selling out to the cruise ship companies makes no economic sense. Three million (3,000,000) cruise ship passengers at an average per passenger spend rate of $50 per person is $150,000,000, but one hundred and thirty thousand (130,000) overnight hotel visitors at an average per overnight guest spend rate of $1150 amounts to the same $150,000,000. The FNM convention offered no justification for spending scarce financial resources on low-yield cruise passengers, when the monies would be more effectively spent on producing onshore activities and attractions that would cause both high-yield hotel guests and low-yield cruise ship passengers on smaller cruise vessels to spend more vacation dollars in our local economy.

Minister Vanderpool-Wallace did not seek to justify the Ingraham administration’s rationale behind investing these millions in and giving concessions to foreign entities such as the cruise lines, while further permitting these economic fat cats to control the estimated $250 million on-shore tour business through greedy, monopolistic practices which deny Bahamian tour operators the opportunity to earn a fair share of this tourism business. While the cruise lines have been permitted to ride roughshod over these local tour operators and stifle fair competition in the process, there were no suggestions by the minister about what is being done to create a fair marketplace that will enable these Bahamian small businesses to profit from this major pillar of our economy. Does the FNM care more about further empowering wealthy cruise lines, than it does about beginning to empower Bahamian small businesses?

What incentive does the government have to give unfair advantages to these cruise lines which help to destroy Bahamian small businessmen? The National Development Party believes that anti-trust legislation, which would make such anti-competition practices illegal, is urgently needed. Such legislation would also ensure that the Over-the-Hill community in New Providence, and other less developed communities around the country, would receive the same economic incentives as provided for in legislation such as the City of Nassau Revitalization Act in a bid to create a more vibrant experience for visitors to our shores. 

The Minister of State for Finance mentioned that the cabinet would move “as quickly as possible” to reduce the country’s debt to GDP ratio to the 30-35% range, once local economic conditions improve. Moody’s estimates that the local debt/GDP ratio will be 50% by next year, notwithstanding the more conservative estimate of 38.9% as at June of this year, purported by the Prime Minister in his recent budget communication. Any plan to reduce this ratio will involve either increasing customs duties, decreasing government spending, increasing taxation, or any combination of the three. What is the plan if the pre-recession tourism decline continues even after the U.S. economy shows stronger signs of recovery? In an economy based predominantly on tourism, it will be near impossible to increase customs duties or taxes in the midst of a poor tourism market. Furthermore, Minister Laing alluded to the fact that long-term deficit spending for infrastructure and social service programs is unsustainable. This speaks to the danger inherent in an economic approach of continuing to depend so heavily on a single revenue stream, such as this administration seems intent on doing with tourism.

Minister Laing also mentioned efforts to make The Bahamas an easier place in which to do business, but he failed to mention any concrete plans to make energy cheaper for Bahamian households or local businesses. The high cost of energy is unsustainable, with new reports that BEC spent just under $1 billion for oil imports/electricity generation in 2008, and begs a plan that provides a cheaper alternative to the current reliance on fossil fuels. Regrettably, there was no talk at the convention of incentives being introduced for businesses seeking to provide less expensive alternative energy sources. Rather than articulating a plan to diversify the nation’s energy supply, the Prime Minister thought it would be more impressive to talk about creating a payment plan for those BEC consumers now in arrears. The FNM’s answer is not a new energy plan, but a new payment plan. This economic approach is neither visionary nor innovative, it is business as usual. Answering any test with the same failed approaches of the past is nothing short of failure on the part of this Ingraham administration. 

Crime:

Our country is under siege by a criminal element that has no fear of the law. Bahamians were optimistic that Minister of National Security, The Hon. Tommy Turnquest would speak to new measures that his administration is taking to deal forcefully with the rampant lawlessness that appears will lead to the highest number of homicides ever recorded in a single year in this nation’s history. Minister Turnquest’s remarks seemed to place full blame for the out-of-control crime problem on the breakdown of the family in our society and said that crime is not a political problem, notwithstanding the fact that his party made crime a political issue when the Hon. Cynthia Pratt was Minister of National Security under the former administration. We, the National Development Party, believe that it is unfortunate that there seem to be two rules according to Minister Turnquest: One set of rules when you’re in opposition and another set of rules when you’re in governance. It is even more unfortunate and ironic quite frankly, that the minister sought to shirk responsibility at a convention whose slogan was: “Tough Times. Tested Leadership.”

The Minister is right, crime is not a political issue; crime is a governance issue. Instead of using his national convention platform to address critical issues that have made crime more acute, such as the illegal gun trade and the steps being taken by the government to get the guns off of our streets, he ignored these issues entirely. Crime will always thrive in any society where there is no respect for the Rule of Law or for those on the frontlines of the fight against crime. Unfortunately, the majority of Bahamians see Minister Turnquest as being a weak politician who does not possess the gravitas to head a ministry as challenging as the Ministry of National Security (MoNS).

While we, the National Development Party, acknowledge the challenges posed by a myriad of social problems facing our country and their impact on crime, we believe that this is no excuse for Minister Turnquest’s failure to implement law enforcement policies and strategies to combat criminal behavior. One of the measures that he has failed to implement is a ‘zero-tolerance’ crime policy that would cause criminals to fear and respect the Rule of Law. When there is a level of contempt for the law, whereby persons shoot at, injure or kill law enforcement personnel serving in the line of duty, it is no wonder that so many civilians are today the targets and victims of violent crime.

Instead of ‘zero-tolerance’, several criminals have been granted bail after committing brazen acts of violence using firearms against law enforcement personnel and endangering public safety in the process. If criminals can so easily receive bail after being charged with taking the lives or attempting to take the lives of those charged with enforcing the law, the state is guilty of encouraging criminals to lose all fear of breaking the law, and this leads to the creation of a culture of anarchy. Contrary to the excuse used by the Minister, it wasn’t the families that granted these men bail, it was the judicial system guided by a weak penal code – a penal code that Minister Turnquest has failed to strengthen in his two and a half years governing the MoNS.

We believe that in order to successfully overcome these tough times of rampant crime, the task requires a tough leader in the MoNS. We believe that the lack of an innovative ‘zero-tolerance’ approach by this ministry has been the primary reason for its dismal performance in being unable to curb the escalation of crime in our country. We, therefore, call on the Prime Minister to quickly replace Minister Turnquest with someone who has the vision and political will to succeed in this critical position of governance. 

Land Reform:

The FNM tabled a Planning and Subdivisions Bill just prior to their convention and Prime Minister Ingraham spoke about his party’s interest in using this bill to protect investment by Bahamians in real property and to protect them from unscrupulous land developers. At no time, however, during the convention did Prime Minister Ingraham or Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Earl Deveaux, explain why they did not see fit to use this “Planning” bill to repeal the abused Quieting Titles Act and to codify a proper land registration system into the act. Investments by Bahamians in real property will always be risky until these changes are made. Unfortunately, for all the talk about how tough the Ingraham administration is, the absence of such political will to use this land planning legislation to comprehensively deal with land reform shows that this administration is not truly interested in protecting and empowering Bahamian land owners. The National Development Party calls on this administration to demonstrate its true concern for Bahamian land owners by amending the Planning and Subdivisions bill with provisions that will permit a proper system of land registration and the repeal of the Quieting Titles Act.

The Media and Freedom of Information:

The FNM’s convention started with media controversy that begs these questions: Did certain FNM party officers try to control media coverage of their convention? In exchange for payment to the various privately owned radio and television stations, did the party seek to dictate which media commentators or analysts would be permitted to provide commentary at their convention? Why were political commentators/analysts such as Mr. Ortland Bodie and Mr. Godfrey Eneas not performing the roles they performed at the political convention held by another political party two (2) weeks prior? Persons in the media claimed that the party’s position was that it was paying for the airtime and as such it had the right to choose who could or could not be used on radio or television broadcasts of the convention. Is this true?

Against this backdrop of apparent attempts at media control, not once during the FNM’s convention were the words freedom of information act used together in a sentence. You cannot believe in freedom of information if you do not believe in freedom of the media. Ironically, in these tough times, the FNM’s apparent move to control media coverage of its convention, show clearly that they are thin-skinned and not tough enough to handle criticism by certain members of the media.

The National Development Party expects that going forward, in an effort to promote mature and healthy political discourse, media houses will be allowed to promote fair and balanced political commentary by having persons representing other political parties serve as on-air commentators/analysts throughout the parties respective conventions. To this end, we join all freedom loving Bahamians in calling on the governing Ingraham administration to immediately implement a genuine Freedom of Information Act entailing provisions that will provide true empowerment and freedom of the media.