While interim leader of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) states that they ‘heard the message that was delivered to us [the PLP] on May 10 and we are responding”, I would dare ask him, exactly what was the message as he understood it?

Excerpt from this article; “Reflecting on the Progressive Liberal Party’s PLP May 10 loss, Interim Leader Philip Brave Davis yesterday insisted that the PLP’s convention this week will show that the party has changed.

‘I hope that the convention will demonstrate to the Bahamian people that we have heard the message that was delivered to us on May 10 and we are responding,’ Davis told reporters after a prayer breakfast at Melia, Nassau Beach resort, which opened the convention.

‘So what they see at the convention, during the convention and post convention, will be a response to the message sent on May 10^th.

‘I expect us to reflect on where we are, understand the times and season that we are in and craft a new imaging of our party going forward.’

‘I think we need to be able to demonstrate to the Bahamian people that we are reworking our vision to reflect what the Bahamian people would like to see.”

As Mr. Davis states, they have listened to the message sent on May 10^th and as I have asked, exactly what was it that they got from this ‘message’? 

Mr. Davis and the Progressive Liberal Party would now have the Bahamian people believe that after six months as opposition, they have had a revelation and now have ‘changed’ and understand exactly what the Bahamian people need?

Would it not seem logical to Mr. Davis that if HE really heard ‘the message’ and really understood it, then he would/should realize that HE was/is a part of the problem and therefore cannot be a part of the solution going forward?

It is my opinion, that the Bahamian people rejected the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) to such a resounding degree because they had lost all confidence in them and saw them as being ‘corrupt’ or less than honest with them; doesn’t Mr. Davis see that if he wins he will also have to change his very own image in order to bring about a positive change within that party in the eyes of the people, because he to carries the stigma of the PLP being a ‘corrupt party’?

Mr. Davis speaks to crafting ‘’ a new imaging of our party going forward” but can he be a ‘bridge to the future,  as Perry Christie once purported to be when he [Mr. Davis] represents the image of the ‘old guard’, the persons that brought about  the deep mistrust of the PLP with the Bahamian people; this we will have to see as he promises “to demonstrate to the people that we [the PLP] are reworking our vision to reflect more of what the Bahamian people would like to see.”  But I have serious doubts that barring an act of God himself, that he will be able to convince the masses that the party’s image has changed along with its ideals, which it openly displayed over their last five years in government, over the past six months.

END

 

 

“Campbell faces new citizenship challenge” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “Two weeks after Transport and Local Government Frankie Campbell rejected speculation he has dual citizenship, Attorney Wayne Munroe, QC has confirmed he is looking into challenging in court whether the Cabinet minister’s citizenship can be rightfully established.

Of concern is whether the Southern Shores MP’s eligibility to run for Parliament and be elected to office was legitimate, Mr. Munroe said yesterday.  In an interview with The Tribune the lawyer said he was asked by former Senator Rodney Moncur to represent a constituent who wished to raise in court matters challenging Mr. Campbell’s Bahamian citizenship.”

Okay let me see if I have the facts of this case straight; Mr. Munroe, on the advice of Mr. Moncur seeks to challenge the citizenship of member of parliament Frankie Campbell based on an affidavit allegedly sworn to by Mr. Campbell’s mother and another woman along with another document on behalf a constituent of the Southern Shores constituency?

Just at faced value I must ask if it has already been established that his father was Bahamian, now deceased, then what is the problem but there seems to be other things at play here and most of them based in the realms of speculation, unless some are suggesting that Mr. Campbell was not born in The Bahamas and that he was brought here illegally.

So are some suggesting that he was actually born in Haiti and subsequently smuggled into the country?  This would suggest and it is speculated that his father or the man whose name he carries, Edwin Campbell, is not actually his father and further speculation is that maybe this is the reason as to why he [Edwin Campbell] never signed for Minister Campbell, a lot of speculation in that argument.

Then there is the constitutional argument; Mr. Moncur argues that as per Chapter Two of The Bahamas Constitution 3.-(1) “Every person who, having been born in the former Colony of the Bahama Islands, is on 9^th of July 1973 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies shall, if his father becomes or would but for his death have become a citizen of The Bahamas in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph, become a citizen of The Bahamas on July 10^th 1973.”, claims that this makes Mr. Campbell a non-citizen because at the time of his birth he was not a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies and also Mr. Moncur claims that Mr. Campbell cannot claim citizenship from his father because his father was not married to his mother but the constitution itself states that “Every person who, having been born in the former Colony of the Bahama Islands, is on 9^th of July 1973 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies shall, if his father becomes or would but for his death have become a citizen of The Bahamas.”  It has been conceded that Edwin Campbell is the father of Frankie Campbell, so therefore as he is a Bahamian citizen, by the constitution which Senator uses to base his case then becomes a Bahamian citizen; the constitution makes no stipulation of the parents having to be married.  Now Senator Moncur may be able to make a case for a poorly worded or presented affidavit but that is about it, as this does not prove any impropriety on anyone’s behalf beside that of poor workmanship.

So there are two theories as to why Frankie Campbell is not a citizen of The Bahamas; one suggesting that he was not born in The Bahamas and the other suggesting by The Constitution he was never a citizen of The United Kingdom and her Colonies because his parents were unwed and because of this was not automatically made a citizen when The Bahamas became independent in 1973.

Both arguments are simply amazing based in the fact that not only was Mr. Campbell able to obtain documents stating that he is a citizen of The Commonwealth of The Bahamas i.e. a Bahamian passport and other documents but he was also allowed to served on the Royal Bahamas Police Force for 29 years but also served in a diplomatic position in 2010 as Charge d’Affaires at The Bahamas Embassy in Port au Prince, Haiti.

So it would seem that Mr. Campbell was citizen enough to serve in these capacities but is not citizen enough to be an elected official despite the fact that both arguments as to why Minister Campbell should be removed from Cabinet and should resign as a member of parliament make no sense.

END