|
|
|
|
Last Updated: Feb 6, 2017 - 2:32:04 PM |
Speaking Notes
Wrap-up of Budget Debate
Rt. Hon. Hubert Ingraham
Wednesday 8 June, 2011
Mr. Speaker:
I am pleased to provide a summation of my Government’s presentation of the budget estimates for the 2011-2012 fiscal year.
The Central Bank’s announced reduction in the discount rate to 4.50%, which precipitates a reduction in the prime rate to 4.75% - the lowest level since the establishment of the Central Bank in 1974 when the rate stood at 9.50%. The prime rate reached its highest level of 11.0 in 1980 and remained there until 1985 when in that year it fell to 10.0%. It was lowered again in 1986 to 9.0 % where it remained until February, 1992 when it was lowered to 8.0%. It was again lowered by 75 basis points to 7.25% in 1993 and by 50 basis points the following year to 6.75% where it remained through 1998. In 1999 the rate was lowered by 75 basis and remained at 6.0% through 2004.
In short, the prime rate was lowered/decreased by a full 2% during my Party’s previous tenure in office. The Prime Rate was reduced further to 5.50% in 2005 and remained there until now. Now it has been reduced to its record low of 4.75%.
I note that the drop in the prime rate this year reflects the same confidence in the economy which the reduction in 2005 is said to have reflected.
I note, also Mr. Speaker, that there will be winners and losers. Borrowers will benefit immediately.
The reduction in the prime rate on the mortgage portfolio of $2.9 billion for the country will be some $22 million.
On a more personal level the reduction in the Prime Rate will result in benefits for Home Mortgage Loan as follows:
AVERAGE LOAN AMOUNT
Home Mortgages for $100,000 for 25 years at 8.7% (old rate) attracted monthly payments of $822.15. The same mortgage at the new rate of 8% will be $771.82; a monthly savings of $50 or a savings of $15,000 over the life of the mortgage.
For a Home Mortgage of $250,000 over 25 years at 8.75% (old rate)
Monthly payment $2,055.55
The same Home Mortgage - $250,000 for 25 years at 8.00% (new rate) will result in
A monthly payment $1,929.71
BENEFITS
Monthly savings of $125.84 and $37,757.12 over 25 years
AVERAGE LOAN AMOUNT
Home Mortgage - $300,000 for 25 years at 8.75% (old rate)
Monthly payment $2,466.70
Conventional Mortgage - $300,000 for 25 years at 8.00% (new rate)
Monthly payment $2,315.65
BENEFITS
Monthly savings of $151.05 and $45,275.94 over 25 years
Mr. Speaker:
For the Bahamas Mortgage Corporation, the effect of this prime rate change will be a reduction to 6.44% for the average mortgage interest rate and a drop of $ 79.00 for the average monthly mortgage payment. This represents an annual savings of $948 to the average borrower and a savings of $21,400 over the average life of the mortgages. For the Corporation itself the savings in its cost of funding over the next year will be $1.266 million due to the drop in interest on its bonds.
Mr. Speaker:
These savings will be left in the hands of the mortgage holder – they can decide to continue paying the higher sum and thereby pay off their mortgages and become debt free earlier. They can determine to invest their savings in other necessary needs of the family or they can begin to build a nest egg for retirement or to cover unforeseen expenses in the future. The choice will be in their hands.
However, I encourage and entreat those who can continue to make their present mortgage payments to continue to do so as it will be less expensive for them over the life of the mortgage if they do so. For those who are stretched however, lower monthly payments would be an immediate welcome relief.
The Government may also benefit from savings of between $23 to 25 million in interest payments on its bonds and loans! I say may because US interest rates may increase and if they do, so will the Government’s foreign currency (US $) loans.
In respect of the $2.1 billion in consumer loans outstanding, I expect and trust that banks will also reduce that rate by .75% which will result in a net savings to consumer borrowers of nearly $16 million. I say this taking into account that when these loans would have been given by the banks the money they were lending was on deposit at interest rates tied to the discount rate. And so, I hope that they will follow suit.
Mr. Speaker:
Savers on the other hand, will experience a decrease in their interest earnings. The National Insurance Board will for example experience a decline in revenue of $6.8 million from existing investments tied to prime and an additional estimated $2.2 million on opportunity revenue lost as they are offered approximately .75% less on maturing deposits over the next 12 months.
In summary, the effect over the next year will be roughly a $9 million decline in revenue to NIB.
The Mortgage Corporation and other Pension Funds, Credit Union deposits and depositors generally will be negatively affected by the rate reduction.
Mr. Speaker:
Perhaps in my earlier contributions on this Budget I did not speak clearly about the payment of a lump sum to teachers, police officers, defence force officers, customs and immigration and prison officers, nurses and all other civil servants or public officers currently at the top of their pay scales. Note that I said top of their pay scales; not bar. Bars in respect of pay scales were eliminated during my last tenure in office. This payment to teachers is that provided for in the 2006 Contract agreed between the Government and the Bahamas Union of Teachers (BUT).
In 2006, again in total disregard of public service salary scales, a $1,500 across the board salary increase, to be paid in 2008, was agreed with the BUT by the then Government. Upon payment salaries immediately became ‘off- point’ on approved salary scales.
For instance, the salary for a trained teacher with a Bachelor’s Degree begins at $25,200 per annum and such a teacher is eligible to receive annual increments of $700 over a 13 year period, up to a maximum $34,000 per annum under the Employment Contract concluded in November, 2006.
Unfortunately, neither the Government - as represented by the Minister of Public Service Fred Mitchell and the Minister of Education Alfred Sears - nor the Union took full account of annual increment amounts in agreeing the maximum salary of $34,000 for if they had, the maximum agreed in the Contract signed by Members Opposite (Sears and Mitchell) with the Bahamas Union of Teachers would not have been $34,000 but instead $34,300 as provided for in the public service salary scales.
It would appear that the Departments of the Government did not maintain diplomatic relations and hence the negotiations by the Ministry of Education and the BUT were not fully informed on Public Service salary scales.
Hence, when the $1,500 across the board salary increase was paid to teachers in 2008 as required by the 2006 Contract between the Government and the BUT, every teacher’s salary became off-point. And furthermore, the salary of some teachers went beyond the maximum of the salary scale for trained teachers.
The Treasury has found itself obliged to enforce the terms of the 2006 Contract and hence has not paid full increments to some teachers who, if they received a full increment, would have also had salaries beyond the maximum of the salary scale.
This Budget permits such disadvantaged teachers to receive an adjustment (the sum not received when they were last eligible to receive an increment) and further to become eligible for one additional increment. This will be so for all teachers whose salaries will not extend beyond $35,700 p.a. which will become the new maximum of the scale for a trained teacher.
I say this clearly because I am aware that some 1,013 teachers in the S12 Trained Teacher salary scale are presently earning salaries above the maximum of the Scale, i.e. $34,300. I am told that after we extend this salary scale by two increments some 655 trained teachers in the S12 Salary Scale will continue to receive salaries above the new minimum of the Scale, i.e. $35,700. We are unable to see our way clear to further expand teachers salary scales. Additional teachers in other Salary Scales will be similarly affected but those numbers are smaller.
I am advised that some 1,426 teachers will benefit from the salary adjustment/lump sum payment and some 1,133 police officers will similarly benefit.
Mr. Speaker:
I wish to comment very briefly on remarks reported in the press on behalf of The Bahamas Chamber of Commerce and Employers’ Confederation (BCCEC). I am mindful that I am responding to their initial comments which may not reflect the considered views of BCCEC after its members have had an opportunity to conclude their assessment. I look forward to having sight of their considered views.
Regarding the general comment that $25 million is not being spent where it is most needed, I must say that observation entirely misses the mark. This initiative seeks to respond directly to the need to improve the availability and adequacy of skills in the labour market, improving its efficiency, while adding the maximum stimulus to a weakened economy and easing the high levels of unemployment now challenging our society. There is no more direct and indeed no other way to accomplish these objectives. The notion that an alternative would have been to pursue this strategy through concessions to industry is clearly not a considered option.
In the first place, no stimulus to economic spending is more direct and more instant than wages paid to formerly unemployed workers. Secondly, there is no other way to ease unemployment than engaging the unemployed. And the best way to improve labour skills and efficiency is by the strategy we have identified.
I would acknowledge a criticism that the program could be larger. My only defence is that the size of the program is constrained by our fiscal circumstances.
To suggest incentives to industry as an alternative mechanism is not a serious suggestion. And the idea that $25 million is needed more urgently somewhere other than easing the burden of unemployment by means of improving the skills and efficiency of labour in a way that adds an instant stimulus to the economy is clearly faulty thinking.
Mr. Speaker:
Notwithstanding protests to the contrary by Members Opposite, this Budget is indeed a jobs budget; it is also a pro-business budget – very particularly a pro-small business budget.
And again, notwithstanding efforts to ignore the provisions included under relevant Heads, this is an anti-crime Budget, and a pro-social development Budget.
There are some in this place who enjoy making spectacles of themselves in declaring their dedication and love for the Bahamian people; their actions do not match their words.
I find it curious that the number of Members Opposite in commenting on the very positive job creation aspects of this Budget cautioned first that it is not enough, and second, that in their application, the benefits of these programmes will only accrue to supporters of the FNM.
I have often repeated a refrain in the years since 1992; it goes: “we are different from them, distinctly different”. I say it again and very pointedly in response to Members Opposite allegations that the jobs in this budget will only benefit FNMs.
The reality is that our jobs programme is good; it is responsible and it will improve the job readiness of some, create new jobs and employment opportunities for others and enhance job security for the employed work force.
Because Members Opposite typically use their power, authority and influence when in office to overwhelmingly benefit their friends and acquaintances to the exclusion of others, they assume that the training programmes and the jobs initiatives being put in place in this Budget will benefit FNMs disproportionately.
A review of the many Bahamian companies and individuals awarded Government contracts during FNM Administrations Government will show that contracts are awarded to the best and most compliant bidder regardless to the political affiliation of the principals of the companies or individuals involved.
The Bahamian people do not believe that our programmes benefit FNMs disproportionately; the Bahamian people do not believe that we institute jobs programmes and training opportunities just for FNMs. I know that I am trusted by the Bahamian people.
Neither Members Opposite nor any ‘flash in the pan’ will change the people’s view of me. And it doesn’t matter how much they lambaste, ridicule and diss me. Indeed, it does not matter how many of them despise me; and in a few cases, hate me. I am here because the people want me here. So don’t be angry with me, it ain’t me; it’s the people. And, as they say, they can put that in their pipe and smoke it.
Mr. Speaker:
This Budget has been carefully crafted to use scarce Government revenue in a manner that will benefit most Bahamians, to maximise the positive that the Government can do to fight crime, to enhance education, improve access to health care, upgrade infrastructure, grow the economy, and stimulate job creation thereby improving the standard of living of Bahamians. If that is political – so be it. If that is an election budget – so be it.
The FNM has a long and distinguished record and the emotional but empty charges delivered against this Budget will not erase the good that we have done and are doing in bringing potable water to Eleuthera, Docks in Long Island and Andros, new classrooms in Inagua, New Bight, Cat Island, Spanish Wells or Mastic Point Andros; in Eight Mile Rock, a fire station in Freeport, a port and a bridge in North Abaco, a terminal building and control tower in Marsh Harbour and fresh water for thousands of residents in Eastern New Providence etc., etc.
Mr. Speaker:
We have been criticised for investing NIB pension funds in Commonwealth Brewery and for making shares in that company available to any and all Bahamian citizens because the company trades in and manufactures alcoholic beverages. Members Opposite have never expressed any reservation about collecting taxes from such companies – and it is those taxes that pay all of our salaries and provides public services. Nor have they ever held any reservation when some of their members and indeed some of their strongest supporters owned that Company, earned dividends from that Company and no doubt contributed to their political campaigns from profits achieved from that Company.
Regrettably, Members Opposite have offered very little of consequence to this debate, charging that the Government, made up of politicians, presented a Political Budget or an Election Budget. Mr. Rick Lowe wrote a lovely little letter to the newspaper that addressed this phenomenon, it read as follows:
“Dear Editor,
The politicians that make up the present government have released their budget for the next 12 months.
Meanwhile, the politician that is the leader of the official opposition is quoted in the press as saying the budget “is an election ploy” designed to get votes, while the only independent politician is quoted as saying the budget is “political”.
Well the dictionary says that a politician is “a person who is professionally involved in politics, esp. as a holder of or a candidate for an elected office.”
So shouldn’t one expect a politician to be political or attempt to get votes?
Politicians confuse me.
Sincerely,
Rick Lowe”
Mr. Speaker:
I feel obliged to comment on a few specific things said by some Member Opposite.
I begin with Elizabeth who in this debate adopted what is his characteristic style of stringing together outrageous statements one after the other in a pretense of financial acumen. Among his gems this time, were several beauties like this: “… if one looks at the finances of the country one could very will conclude the Bahamas is insolvent”.
Of course, S&P does not agree with him. They grade the Bahamas debt as investment grade. Our external reserves are at an all-time high of over $1 billion as compared to $142 million in 1992. Our debt to GDP project at 45 per cent at the end of this fiscal period is by far among the lowest in the region and less than one-half the ratio in the U.S. How he arrives at the conclusion of Bahamian insolvency is not explained. He just makes the outrageous statement.
He laments the recurrent deficit which occurred during the greatest economic crisis the world has seen since the period of the Great Depression but failed to acknowledge that his party accumulated a recurrent deficit of $400 million during a period of economic growth and prosperity as compared to __________.
He railed against an increase in the national debt from $2.89 billion to $4.25 billion for an increase of 47% in a period of economic crisis. He should note that in a period of relation prosperity his party when it was last in Government increased the national debt from $1.98 billion to $2.89 billion for an increase of 46%. I say again this similar increase in the national debt under his party’s governance occurred during a period of global economic well-being.
One could overlook the stridency with which he makes his outrageous statements, except that he makes them with such pretense of soundness and credibility that it is somewhat difficult to ignore or not to call out.
Mr. Speaker:
I am obliged to correct a number of miss-statements uttered by the member for North Andros.
No, it is not true that 736 Bahamians were dismissed from BTC day before yesterday or yesterday and we do not expect dismissals from BTC except for cause, period!
The Member also claimed that this Budget failed to show the expenditure for the Government’s $39 million contribution toward the BTC workers Pension Plan. None are so blind, Mr. Speaker, as those who refuse to see. I provide for the Honourable Member a copy of the Bill that was tabled in this House on Wednesday the 27th May, 2011 in respect of that Supplementary expenditure and I ask the Clerk to provide a copy to the Member who appears not to have received his copy or perhaps who has managed to misplace it.
Mr. Speaker,
The Member for North Andros asserts that too many resources are being expended in Abaco. Yes, we are building a new port in North Abaco. I wonder whether the Member recalls that two ports were built in Andros, one in Driggs Hill and the other in the member’s constituency at Morgan’s Bluff. It isn’t Abaco’s fault that the dock at Driggs Hill is useless, in the wrong location and a complete waste of public funds.
The Member has similarly neglected to say that this FNM Government is replacing two bridges in South Andros at Little and Deep Creek and a dock in Fresh Creek in Central Andros – all matters left undone by he and his colleagues when they were last in office.
And, it is not Abaco’s fault that the Member wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars in a subdivision that never came to be – all in pursuit of his re-election.
Mr. Speaker,
Farmers in Andros
The Member for North Andros also complained about the plight of farmers in North Andros. I advise that as a result of my Government’s policies of encouraging innovation and production, Andros Farmers are today producing more than ever before. We celebrate their accomplishments and work with them.
In his remarks, the Minister of Agriculture noted that Andros farmers had begun harvesting onions in February. This early harvest of onions puts the Andros farmer in a position to compete for the premium “sweet onion” market dominated by the famous Vidalia and Walla Walla onions. Plainly, farmers who are able to supply this market can earn far higher prices for their products in the south-eastern United States. The Department of Agriculture is working with them to exploit these markets, while they deepen the penetration in The Bahamian market. The Member would also know of the support arranged through the Ministry of Agriculture and BAIC for the farmers of Andros and elsewhere in The Bahamas to sell their products directly to institutional customers, hotels, and restaurants
Mr. Speaker:
Replacement of Barging
This is perhaps an opportune time to advise that the Government has determined to discontinue the barging of water from Andros. The quality of the water from Reverse Osmosis has been found to be of a more consistent quality and the cost of the water, based on the increased demand in New Providence, is cheaper than barged water.
As a result of this decision, WSC has looked at its North and Central Andros operations to determine the best deployment of its human resources. In total, there are 26 persons employed between North and Central Andros - fourteen (14) directly involved in the barging operations.
WSC has met with the personnel in Andros and at Arawak Cay to undertake an assessment. Persons were reviewed by age, years of service, and skills in order to determine how best to accommodate redeployment and early retirement. Twelve (12) persons will be offered retirement and/or redundancy packages on terms not less favourable than BTC staff were offered.
Mr. Speaker:
Members Opposite continue to make hallow claims that this Budget does not make sufficient allocations to fight an effective anti-crime campaign. On opening this debate I put a lie to those allegations demonstrating where money was being expended to engage crime fighters, to acquire additional crime fighting equipment, to expand our courts - at the magistrate and supreme court level, to engage additional counsel in the office of the attorney general, to construct a remand court in Fox Hill, to continue and augment Urban Renewal programmes not only in New Providence but in Grand Bahama and to expand programmes in our schools promoting peaceful resolution of disputes, self-respect and respect for others. And of course, I alluded to continued initiatives to amend our laws to match the level of sophistication of today’s criminals and to restrict the too generous award of bail to individuals charged with violent offences.
Regrettably, this House has witnessed the most shameless politicisation of crime during this budget debate in my recent memory. The assumed fervour that a magic-bullet has not been discovered in the last four years, as if that was the beginning of the scourge of serious crime in our land, would be laughable had it not been for the seriousness of the issue we face.
With almost venomous vitriol the Member for Cat Island and San Salvador heaped blame upon the Government for the continuance of crime in our country over the last four years and for the absence, as he sees it, of a plan in the Budget for crime’s eradication. He discretely draws a line of demarcation at the end of his party’s last term in office and this Government’s present term in office when this plan for crime’s eradication should have been working its wonderful magic. He notes how our citizens deserve the right to live, work and move about peacefully. A right he seems to suggest they did not have before, since he clearly would not suggest it was not fulfilled by his side. He notes that crime has dissolved the social fabric that binds Bahamians together – a dissolution which he presumes to have occurred only within the last four years. And then he turns to the need to expand the resources employed to fight crime. But never have those resources been more generous and more in evidence than on our watch.
Nevertheless, I want to welcome the Member for Cat Island, Rum Cay and San Salvador to the people’s side on the issue of crime. In previous debates in this place I did not always glean that he was on the people’s side. His contributions, as I recall, were skewed in favour of the law-breakers and not the people. There was much consternation by him during debate on amendments to the Bail Act, meant to reduce the number of persons charged for serious crimes before our courts being afforded bail. I welcome Cat Island to our side, the side of the people, in the fight against crime and criminals.
Criminals must not be harboured, cloaked or comforted!
It is always heartening to me though when a sinner professes to have changed and I am always especially pleased when a poacher becomes a warden. I say no more.
Mr. Speaker:
The Member for Bain and Grants Town also had much to say about crime. I recall for him that he chaired a House Committee on Crime. He might wish to point to recommendations from that Committee that might be implemented to alleviate the crime problem.
The Honourable Member has spent considerable time studying the crime phenomenon in our country. He will have discovered that the rise in crime, particularly violent crime, is underpinned by illegal drugs. He knows when our drug problem began. We are reaping that which was sowed more than 30 years ago – the findings of the 1984 Commission of Inquiry gives us a good base from whence to begin.
St. Cecelia, the Minister of National Security in the last Government led by Members Opposite said that most of our crime is drug related. I believe she knows of what she speaks. The Police advise that 44% of all murders committed in our country are drug-related!
Mr. Speaker:
Crime is a complex phenomenon which depends on an accommodating stance from many of us and which benefits from the duplicitous ranting of others of us to give it a certain freedom of movement when we become distracted and focus on feel-good initiatives of limited consequence.
I continue to believe that the most important missing component in our war against crime is the failure of too many taking responsibility for their actions; excusing the bad, and illegal behaviour of family members and acquaintances and perhaps most seriously willingly benefitting from crime.
That precisely is the accommodating landscape that permits the scourge of crime to progress; this urge to place the true burden for the reduction and ultimate elimination of crime beyond ourselves. That ability to place responsibility somewhere else with the greatest conviction and not to recognize that without some small or great acquiescence from all of us there is no way that crime could achieve the levels it does in our communities.
That acquiescence from some of us is very considerable, especially when we distinguish between the law-breaker and his ill-gotten fortune sufficiently to accept his generous donations without the slightest sense of guilt. Or when we look beyond the crime to see a friend we’ve known for many years and cannot bring ourselves to recognize him as an enemy of society – a candidate for prosecution.
Or, when we seek to distinguish between the criminal behaviour of the gun-totting youth and the outwardly respectable facilitators of that deplorable trade that virtually manufactures that criminal youth.
Mr. Speaker:
I was gratified that the Member for South Eleuthera acknowledged the good that we are doing in his constituency including the repaving of roads in Tarpum Bay and Rock Sound where residents have suffered from poor roads for far too long.
And the people of Tarpum Bay will have fresh, clean water because of the FNM Government.
I was distressed and pained on the other hand when I heard the Member for Exuma accuse my Government of being uncaring, spiteful and vindictive. This is a charge I will not soon forget. We did a whole lot for Exuma!
Mr. Speaker,
I had occasion to visit Long Island, Central and North Eleuthera and central and north Cat Island over the past Labour Day holiday weekend and was very pleased by the condition of the roads on each of those islands. Gone are the days of pre-1992 FNM Government when travel writers routinely described the pot-holed filled roadways in articles featuring our Family Islands!
I heard the concern of the Member for MICAL about the condition of the road in Mathew Town. Inagua may be assured that its roads will be addressed.
Mr. Speaker:
The Member for Cat Island sought to remind me during his contribution that, on the campaign trail in 2007, I promised Cat Island that if they supported me I would build them a new terminal at the New Bight International Airport; something which he, their representative then and now, has failed to do for them notwithstanding that he was and remains an influential member of the Government-led by his party from 2002 to 2007.
I want to say that Cat Island did not support me but I am nevertheless determined to build that terminal. We designed the terminal and did not proceed to construction only because of the request by Cat Island Partners, who are developing a PGA Resort on the island, to have input in the terminal’s design. That development has not progressed as quickly as we would have hoped or expected since 2008. We have now given Cat Island Partners until July to let us have their input. We propose to proceed with construction of a terminal at New Bight soon thereafter.
Before the end of this calendar year, the terminal at New Bight will commence – thanks to the FNM.
The member also recorded his concern that the Government had resorted to terminating public officers in the Customs and Immigration Department so as to alleviate presumably, the financial burden of their salaries.
I advise the Honourable Member that between 2008 and today some 16 Immigration officers have retired and 4 have been redeployed elsewhere in the Service. That’s a total of 20. I also advise that between 2010 and up to today we have engaged a total of 63 Trainee Immigration Officers – a net of 43. You do the math.
As regards the Customs Service I note that 25 officers have been redeployed elsewhere in the Service and that some 32 have retired or been dismissed since 2009. And, between 2009 and 2011, 193 new Trainee Customs Officers have been engaged. Again, I say, you do the math!
Mr. Speaker:
Members Opposite never cease to amaze. Still, yesterday the Member for Farm Road and Centreville managed to reach a new level. He has informed the Bahamian people that he will lead the next Government of The Bahamas. Brazen, eh?
Unlike him, I cannot make any such pronouncement. I do not have that power. I and my colleagues can say that we are the better choice and that if re-elected we will continue to give effective and
incorruptible service to the people of The Bahamas. We can also say to them, we have a record, check it out compare it to our opponents.
The Member for Farm Road and Centreville sought in his contribution to the debate of the Budget to take full credit for every project realized by my Government during the past five years.
He claimed as his own the development at Albany and the Baha Mar development which recently broke ground. He didn’t say that his Government failed to complete either deal. That’s how he and they are – plenty, plenty talk but none to little action. Completion of both deals? That was left for my Government. And while Albany was well funded, Baha Mar was not. The world now knows the story.
Mr. Speaker:
The Leader of the Opposition is convinced that there is a singular solution to crime in The Bahamas – Urban Renewal. And he is unwilling to accept that his remodel or version of an existing urban renewal/community policing programme is not necessarily the best and certainly not the only legitimate organization of the programme.
It is clear that his Government’s obsession with politicizing Urban Renewal and collecting accolades for this programme resulted in the neglect of other critically important components of anti-crime initiatives including expansion of the court infrastructure and manpower, criminal legislative reform, introduction of state of the art anti-crime technology (like CCTV and monitoring ankle bracelets); improvements in the administration of justice so as to improve the rate of successful prosecutions. All initiatives are now receiving attention and we continue at the same time to expand the much heralded Urban Renewal Programme.
I was especially amused Mr. Speaker, that the Leader of the Opposition has noted his objection to the engagement of Ms. Ella Lewis, a former teacher, retired public servant and former FNM electoral candidate, in the Urban Renewal Programme. Apparently that is too political. Perhaps it was because she had offered her candidature in opposition to his in the 2007 General Election!
He didn’t have the same objection when his Government engaged Mrs. Ruby Ann Darling in the same programme during their recent term in office. Mrs. Darling was not only a former PLP electoral candidate, she is a former PLP Parliamentarian. As is the custom of Members Opposite, they have one set of rules for themselves and another set of rules for others.
He spoke with great passion about his plans for beach parks – at Montague and at West Bay Street in the vicinity of the Caves. He provided insight into what he had planned and discussed with the developers at Albany and with Kerzner International. Of course he had no explanation as to why, in five years in office, not a single recreational park was created by his Government. That compared to my Government’s record in this current term in office, creating the new sea-side Park at Saunders Beach and putting in train the restoration projects of the beach at both Montague Beach and Saunders Beach sea-side parks – projects which are scheduled to commence imminently.
This action is simply in keeping with our conviction that Bahamians deserve high quality recreational spaces. That is why during two previous terms in office during the 1990s we created the Goodman’s Bay sea-side park, created the tennis and basketball park just west of the A.F. Adderley Jr. High School, created the Flamingo Gardens Neighbourhood Park, and redeveloped the inner-city park at Nassau Street opposite the Albury Sayles Primary School, formalized the Down Home Fish Fry and acquired the open green space at West Bay Street at Ferguson Manor (Perpall Tract) creating a new window to the sea.
No, Mr. Speaker, we do not only dream and begin to make plans to improve life for Bahamians, we deliver on our promises.
The Member for Farm Road and Centreville also recalled yesterday his role in early plans for the construction of the new national stadium at the Queen Elizabeth Sports Centre, recalling his trip to China. He forgot to acknowledge that it was the FNM that reversed his Party’s decision to establish diplomatic relations with Taiwan and to recognize the People’s Republic of China as the Government of all of China that made possible his travel to China. If his Party’s policy had not been reversed he would have been visiting Taiwan I suppose.
He also omitted acknowledging to Honourable Members that his Government permitted the first delivery of steel for the construction of the proposed stadium to languish and rust on site because his Government could not conclude the agreements necessary to facilitate the commencement of construction.
Mr. Speaker:
Perhaps my greatest surprise listening to the contribution by the Leader of the Opposition yesterday was his suggestion that Dominican fishing vessels be blown out of the water when found poaching in our territorial waters. A startling statement by a former Prime Minister and a man who continues to harbour desires to lead again.
We must presumably that those fishing vessels are typically manned by human beings. I am not aware of any Bahamian law which would authorize our Defence Force to summarily execute fish poachers, which is what the Leader of the Opposition appeared to have been proposing.
His comments were not only wholly inappropriate and wrong they are unhelpful at a time when we seek to promote peaceful settlements of disputes in our country; when we seek to lower the tenor of anger in discourse and when we seek to promote respect for law and order generally and for human rights specifically.
Once again the Leader of the Opposition is appealing to emotion, to jingoistic nationalism and to the lowest common denominator. Bombastic ill-considered remarks made to gain effect regardless of the consequences. This is unacceptable in a leader. To be blunt; a Leader he is not.
Mr. Speaker,
Members Opposite have officially launched their campaign for the 2012 General Election. Under all their protestations that this is an election budget was their plan to use this debate as the kick off of their campaign.
Having opposed the sale of BTC; having criticized the Government for its borrowings to facilitate a massive infrastructural upgrade and having objected to the terms agreed with the China Construction Company as principal contractors for the Baha Mar project, the Leader of the Opposition now concludes that we left all these matters to this period in order to gain an election advantage.
The logic escapes me!
My Government remains committed to bringing better for all Bahamians. We will work continuously and untiringly to fulfill our agenda. Better is coming – again.
Mr. Speaker:
Finally, I note that this Budget is meant to continue the fulfilment of my Government’s promise to the Bahamian people. We asked the Bahamian people to place their trust in us and that we would do our utmost to deliver change for the better; to modernize our country, to improve its infrastructure and make the delivery of our public services more efficient and effective; to reform our administrative procedures so as to reduce red tape and bureaucracy, to advance our legislative framework to respond to the ever evolving economic conditions and demands and to better arm us to face the challenges presented by an increasingly bold criminal element.
Delivering on our promises and commitments has involved a tremendous amount of change over the past four years. Indeed, the amount of change that continues to take place in our nation, led by my energetic, committed and ethically positive Government is, I believe truly outstanding if unappreciated by Members Opposite.
I accept that change is a resistant virus in and of itself and when combined with the fallout of the global depression...can become highly resistant to any medication. But change is here and it is continuous.
We are determined to ensure that all our people are able not only to cope with but to succeed in the changing environment which is our reality.
Preparing our people and our country’s institutions for success in the future is what our aggressive law reform effort is about. It is similarly what our infrastructure modernization programme is about; what the introduction of tele-medicine was about. And, that is what job readiness training is about. That is what expanded agriculture initiatives and support is about. That is what environmental stewardship is about. That is what e-government is about.
Mr. Speaker:
This Budget supports Government policies and programmes to improve our country. Our actions and policies are based on that fundamental principle.
ALL of my Government’s programmes are based on service to the Bahamian People - their welfare, health, education, comfort, safety and pursuit of their full potential.
In that vein I commend this Budget to all Honourable Members.
Imminent
Tabling Planned for Amendments to Parliamentary Elections Act
Opposition
Leader Fails to Provide Amendment Recommendations
TRANSCRIPT
Prime Minister the Rt. Hon.
Hubert Ingraham
2011/2012 Budget Debate
Wrap-Up
June 9, 2011
Maybe I can use this occasion
Mr. Speaker to urge all eligible voters in The Bahamas to register to
vote. The current register will expire on July 14th. Shortly
thereafter we propose to appoint the Boundaries Commission and the Boundaries
Commission will take account of registered voters to the extent that
that is a reliable indicator.
I also propose table in the
House for passage at an early date, a number of amendments to the Parliamentary
Elections Act, taking account of recommendations made by the Courts
over the years, and I note that since last year, I asked the Leader
of the Opposition in writing for his recommendations and his suggestions.
Despite promises made by him – in fact at New Year’s Junkanoo he
told me that he had appointed a committee, and that I would get it in
weeks – it hasn’t come yet.
I spoke to the Member for Bain
and Grants Town in the House here across the floor, he said “its coming.”
Well, Mr. Speaker it is more than 6 months later. We would like to have
the recommendations of Members Opposite. We can’t wait for them any
longer, we shall proceed with the recommendations which we have, and
table them in the House hopefully when we return on June 20.
I wrote to the Leader of the
Opposition, but the Leader of the Opposition, to be very candid, is
not someone who is very responsive in dealing with his constitutional
responsibilities and duties and/or when he is being consulted by the
Prime Minister.
I would be happy to say that
in his presence or in his absence wherever he is, because on matters
of election laws, we ought to seek as far as is possible to be on all
fours, to be in agreement. We ought not have division because it is
the laws that will govern all sides.
And we’ve been waiting a
long time Mr. Speaker, and we haven’t gotten any response. We therefore
Mr. Speaker, propose to move ahead, notwithstanding that we have been
criticized by them for not having made the amendments as recommended
by the Court. But yet when it comes down to stepping up to the plate,
‘mums the word’.
© Copyright 2011 by thebahamasweekly.com
Top of Page
|
|
|
|
