Either there’s something inherently defective about Fred Mitchell, Chairman of the “New Day” Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), or he thinks the rest of us—rational, thinking Bahamians—were dropped on our heads as infants.

Today, Mitchell, in his usual pompous grandeur, attempts to preempt the opposition’s vote with a dazzling display of political hot air, baseless speculation, and good old-fashioned gibberish. The matter at hand? A straightforward debate on extending the retirement age of Defense Force officers. Simple, right? Well, not if you’re Fred Mitchell.

His “brilliant” argument hinges on the opposition’s stance against the PLP’s unexplained and arbitrary decision to rehire 213 retired police officers—without, might I add, so much as a valid explanation. According to Mitchell, the opposition’s reasonable demand for transparency is somehow an attack on the Royal Bahamas Police Force. Because in the fantasy land Mitchell inhabits, asking logical questions means waging war on institutions.

But wait, there’s more! Mitchell now expects right-thinking Bahamians to believe that Michael Pintard shedding light on the eviction of police officers in Grand Bahama is some sort of cheap political stunt to curry favor with the force. A ridiculous take, even by his standards.

And then, in a truly jaw-dropping display of wisdom, Mitchell suggests that if there was an issue, the Leader of the Opposition should have simply whispered his concerns in private and politely asked the government for help. Right. Because that approach has worked so well for University of The Bahamas students, who are still waiting for a lifeline from this “New Day” government.

Mitchell’s arguments aren’t just weak—they’re a tragic spectacle. He defends this trainwreck of an administration with the enthusiasm of a man who knows he has no real case but insists on arguing anyway. And in his valiant effort to defend the indefensible, he only manages to make less and less sense with every breath.

If these voice notes truly reflect the stance of the PLP as a party and a government, then we can only hope the Lord continues to be our strength—because with leadership like this, divine intervention is our only hope.

The Bahamas deserves better.

END

The biblical parable from Matthew 7:24-27 teaches us that a house built on sand will inevitably succumb to the elements, a clear lesson in the futility of poor foundational choices. This wisdom seems utterly lost on the New Day Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), whose electoral strategy and governance seem as flimsy as a shack teetering on a beachfront.

“PM: FNM is unchanged” – The Nassau Guardian

According to a recent piece in The Nassau Guardian, Prime Minister Philip Brave Davis seems to believe that regurgitating old criticisms of the Free National Movement (FNM) under the Minnis administration constitutes a political strategy. In his melodramatic monologue wrapping up the mid-year budget debate, Davis painted his administration as the saviours of an economy “in crisis,” thanks to the alleged missteps of the FNM.

Davis theatrically lamented the “reckless policies” and “lack of foresight” of the previous government, blaming them for every woe from economic instability to the common cold. Yet, he conveniently glossed over the fact that under the FNM, prior to Dorian and the pandemic, Moody’s had upgraded The Bahamas’ fiscal outlook from negative to stable in 2019—a sign of economic stabilization blatantly ignored by Davis.

Now, let’s dissect the continued narrative of Davis and his finance minister, both beating the same tired drum with a zeal that could only be matched by their most ardent, and perhaps delusional, supporters. They propagate the myth that they turned around an economy in peril, yet shy away from detailing any substantive economic policies that contributed to this supposed revival.

It’s almost comical, if not so tragically misleading, that the PLP accuses the FNM of having “no vision, no strategy, no plan,” when in reality, this seems like a desperate attempt to project their own shortcomings onto their predecessors. This government’s track record so far is as robust as a house of cards in a hurricane—destined to collapse under the weight of its own hollow promises.

In conclusion, the finance minister’s remarks during the Mid-year Budget debate were nothing short of a farce. To regard them as anything more than political theater would be a disservice to the intelligence of the Bahamian people. The New Day PLP, it seems, has not ushered in any new dawn but is merely a continuation of the old dusk. It’s time The Bahamas received the governance it truly deserves, not just more of the same old rhetoric wrapped in new packaging.

END

 On February 24, 2025, the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) publicly defended its decision to grant a 21-year lease to Bahamas Moorings Ltd. for operating mooring services in Exuma. The announcement appeared to come as a reaction to growing concerns over the company’s activities in the area. At the time, the OPM maintained that the lease was in line with environmental preservation efforts, suggesting that moorings are beneficial to protecting marine life and reducing damage to the ecosystem.

‘Deal’ is Dead

On February 25 2025, a mere 24 hours later, the government announced that the agreement with Bahamas Moorings Ltd. was “dead.” This swift turnaround came in the wake of public outrage and revelations that Bahamas Moorings Ltd. had begun installing moorings without obtaining the necessary environmental and regulatory approvals. According to the OPM, the lease required the company to meet specific conditions before proceeding, conditions which had clearly not been met.

The Secret Agreement Unravels

The controversy deepened when it was revealed that an employee from the Office of the Prime Minister had acted as a witness to the lease agreement. The OPM launched an internal review but provided no clear answers as to how such a significant lapse in oversight occurred. The question on many minds was: Who exactly gave Bahamas Moorings Ltd. the green light to install moorings in Exuma’s waters?

Chester Cooper’s ‘Pleased’ Response

 Exuma and Ragged Island MP, Chester Cooper, responded to the deal’s collapse with a curious mix of relief and foresight. “I’m pleased with the outcome,” Cooper said, noting that the outrage among Exumians was not surprising to him. He emphasized the importance of “doing things the correct way” — with full environmental approvals, safety measures, and local consultation. His comments, however, raised more questions than answers. As Deputy Prime Minister and a representative of Exuma, why did he not appear to have been involved in or aware of the approval process? Did no one in the government think to consult him before proceeding with such a consequential deal?

A Ministerial Disconnect

Prime Minister Philip Davis, as the minister responsible for lands, had approved the lease for Bahamas Moorings Ltd. The company had ambitious plans to install 250 moorings over 4,000 acres at 49 locations in Exuma. However, the contradiction between the Prime Minister’s approval and Cooper’s assertion that “there is a correct way to do things” is glaring. Was this a case of bureaucratic miscommunication, or was there a deliberate attempt to bypass proper procedures?

A Convenient ‘Review’

In the aftermath of the scandal, the OPM announced a review of existing mooring fields in The Bahamas. The review aims to assess which mooring fields have proper leases, environmental clearances, port approvals, and Cabinet-level endorsements if necessary. While this might appear to be a progressive step, the timing of this review is highly suspicious. It suggests a reactive approach designed to cover up the original missteps rather than a genuine commitment to transparency.

The Bigger Outstanding Questions

1. Who signed off on the deal without ensuring the proper approvals were in place?
2. Why did the government not announce the deal publicly before the installations began?
3. Was the Deputy Prime Minister truly in the dark about the agreement?
4. How could an OPM employee act as a witness to the agreement without senior officials’ knowledge?

The Bottom Line: A Close Call for Exuma

Ultimately, it was the vigilance of the Exuma community that halted what could have been a severe overreach by the government. The promise to now conduct consultations and regulatory checks is not an achievement — it is the bare minimum that should have been done from the start. The entire episode reeks of a government caught with its hand in the cookie jar, now scrambling to reset the narrative.

If the right-thinking citizens of Exuma had not spoken up, would we ever have known about this clandestine agreement? Who will be held accountable for attempting to pull a fast one on the Bahamian people? These are the questions that demand clear, honest answers from those in power.

END