“Unreasonable” _ The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article;

“Prime Minister Philip Brave Davis said on Friday that Grand Bahama Power Company’s (GBPC) request for an electricity rate increase is “unreasonable”.

Davis also hit out at the Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA) and its assertion it is the sole licensor and regulator of all utilities in Freeport. Davis said under the law, there is only one regulator with the power to approve a rate increase—the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA).

He was referring to a new Electricity Act that was passed earlier this year, which establishes URCA as the only regulator in the country’s energy sector.

However, GBPA has asserted its rights as the regulator for electricity on Grand Bahama, citing its powers as outlined in the Hawksbill Creek Agreement.

So the question really is; Who Holds the Regulatory Reins?

The Grand Bahama Power Company (GBPC) plays a vital role in providing electricity to the residents of Grand Bahama. However, the question of who has the legal authority to regulate this essential service has become a contentious issue, especially following the recent changes in legislation and the longstanding agreements governing the region’s utility sector.”

“Unreasonable” is how Prime Minister Philip Davis describes the request for a price increase by the Grand Bahama Power Company (GBPC), and I would agree with him on this for a couple of reason, one the power supply is not consistent and the power company just received and increase in 2022, but I feel that there is something else brewing beneath this.

There seems to be a vast difference of opinion between the Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA) and the government over who really has the sole regulatory right to the utilities of Grand Bahama.

I have asked who has been regulating Grand Bahama’s power supply all of this time and cannot seem to get and answer and I have asked who legally has the right; these are my finding.

The Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA) Perspective

The Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA) asserts that it is the sole regulator of utilities in Grand Bahama, citing the Hawksbill Creek Agreement, a foundational document that established the framework for the development and governance of the Freeport area. This agreement, signed in 1955, granted the GBPA significant powers and responsibilities, including the regulation of utilities.

Proponents of the GBPA’s claim argue that its regulatory authority has been well-established over decades, providing a consistent framework for utility management in Grand Bahama. They contend that the Hawksbill Creek Agreement is a binding legal document that should remain in effect, thereby underscoring the GBPA’s regulatory jurisdiction over GBPC.

 The Bahamas Government and URCA’s Perspective

On the other hand, the Bahamas government, through the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA), has taken a different position. Following the enactment of the Electricity Act 2024, the government asserts that it now possesses regulatory oversight over GBPC. This law effectively empowers URCA to regulate electricity services, ensuring that they meet certain standards and are provided in a fair and competitive environment.

Supporters of this viewpoint emphasize the necessity for updated regulatory frameworks that reflect modern energy needs and practices. The Electricity Act 2024 aims to enhance consumer protection, promote competition, and encourage sustainable energy practices—objectives that align with global trends in energy regulation.

Breaking down the Legal Framework

The crux of the debate centers around the interpretation of legal agreements and legislative changes. The Hawksbill Creek Agreement, while historically significant, may face challenges in light of the newer legislative framework established by the Electricity Act 2024. Legal experts may argue that legislative changes can supersede prior agreements, particularly when they are designed to serve the public interest and adapt to contemporary regulatory needs.

But what does all of this mean for Consumers and the Industry?

This regulatory tug-of-war has direct implications for the consumers of Grand Bahama. If the GBPA retains its regulatory authority, it may lead to continuity in how services are delivered, but could also stifle innovation and responsiveness to new energy demands. Conversely, if URCA’s regulatory framework prevails, it may pave the way for improved service quality, more competitive pricing, and greater accountability.

With that being said.

As the debate unfolds, it is clear that the regulation of the Grand Bahama Power Company is not merely a legal technicality; it is a matter that affects the livelihoods of many and the future of energy in the region. The interplay between the GBPA and the Bahamas government will likely continue to evolve, and the ultimate resolution will depend on legal interpretations, public policy goals, and the collective will of the stakeholders involved.

In the meantime, consumers and businesses in Grand Bahama must stay informed and engaged, as the outcome of this regulatory duel will shape the energy landscape for years to come. The question of who has the legal right to regulate GBPC remains open, but one thing is certain: the pursuit of a balanced and effective regulatory framework is essential for the sustainable development of Grand Bahama’s energy sector.

END

“FNM Seizes on Government’s ‘Cash Flow Crunch’” – The Tribune

In a striking revelation, the Opposition has jumped on comments from the Progressive Liberal Party’s (PLP) chairman, framing them as proof that the Government is grappling with a significant “cash flow crunch” while “taxing the private sector into oblivion.” Dr. Duane Sands, chairman of the Free National Movement (FNM), pointed out that Fred Mitchell’s message to PLP supporters not only sheds light on the administration’s “aggressive behavior” towards businesses but also confirms the “poorly-kept secret” of the Government’s liquidity challenges.

In a statement that could only be described as a candid admission, Mitchell characterized The Bahamas as being “in a tight economic squeeze.” He emphasized the Government’s reluctance to resort to international credit markets for foreign currency financing due to the heavy burden of debt service that would ultimately fall on taxpayers. He underscored the urgency of collecting every tax dollar owed to the Public Treasury, especially with the looming threat of hurricanes.

“The country is in a tight economic squeeze,” Mitchell declared. “We aim to pay as we go, avoiding borrowing unless absolutely necessary, especially with hurricanes ready to strike at any moment. We must gather every tax dollar before considering credit.”

Mitchell further lamented that while the poor and working-class citizens have been dutifully paying their taxes, some of the wealthier entities have managed to evade their fiscal responsibilities. “The PLP stands as their advocate, ensuring that everyone pays their fair share,” he insisted.

But let’s not forget the PLP’s tendency to circle back to their favorite refrain about “everyone paying their full share.” They aim to paint the FNM as the party of leniency, overlooking their own shortcomings in this arena. The recent reduction of VAT to 10 percent, while simultaneously removing it from essential items, raises questions about whether the poor truly have an advocate in this New Day, Old Way government.

Today, the FNM chairman responded to Mitchell’s comments, which admitted the country is facing a “cash crunch.” While some may have been caught off guard, many of us simply saw this as confirmation of what we’ve long suspected, despite attempts by the Minister of Finance and his team to keep it under wraps.

Naturally, the New Day, New Way government couldn’t take this revelation lying down. They swung back with a press statement denouncing the FNM as engaging in a “desperate attempt to mislead.” They unleashed a litany of grievances, from a 60% increase in VAT to failures surrounding the Oban deal, all while failing to clarify how the FNM’s statements were misleading.

They won’t disclose the outcomes of their VAT hikes, nor the stagnation of the Oban project, and they’re conveniently quiet about their consistent failure to meet fiscal targets. Why introduce truth into this narrative?

In their moment of fury, the PLP may have overlooked addressing the core issue or perhaps aimed to mislead the public themselves. They’ve attacked the FNM for “locking down” the country during the pandemic, while simultaneously labelling their opponents as “desperate.”

Amidst the PLP’s deflection, many are left wondering if it’s true that they owe their professional vendors six months or more in fees. The New Day, Old Way government seems to treat funds like a fleeting windfall, splurging at every opportunity.

While the PLP continues its assault on the FNM, claiming to advocate for those who owe their fair share, they should recognize that they must also acknowledge the FNM’s economic successes in its early years, such as reducing the deficit and improving the country’s standing with Moody’s and S&P and that the Free National Movement (FNM) i snot fighting against the initiative that both political organizations have not upheld over the years.

By neglecting to highlight these achievements and instead pushing their narrative, the PLP is, in essence, misleading the public. The failure of the Progressive Liberal Party stems from one fundamental truth: it’s simply in their nature.

END

Well, well, well, what do we have here on this fine and divinely ordained Sunday morning? I found myself under siege by none other than those devoted followers of the PLP, armed with before-and-after snapshots of the airport over at New Bight, Cat Island.

It seems that the construction crew has nearly wrapped up the concrete block exterior walls and is gearing up to pour those columns. The individual who shared these photos, or perhaps it was a fleeting video, seemed keen on portraying me as flustered by the “progress” that has seemingly materialized under the watchful eye of the representative for Cat Island, Rum Cay, and San Salvador – none other than Prime Minister Philip Davis, Esquire, AKA Secret Squirrel, after a whopping twenty-two years in office.

I must admit, it’s heartening to witness the airport shedding its shabby wooden skin and emerging as a more contemporary edifice complete with indoor seating for the convenience and safety of both residents and visitors. However, the lingering question remains: why did it take our esteemed representative, who once held the titles of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Public Works, so long to give this airport a much-needed facelift?

So, while they tout progress, I’ll nod my head and say, “Alright, we can now fly into New Bight without being left out in the rain. Even if it did take Secret Squirrel a whopping twenty-two years to usher in this long-awaited ‘progress.'”

And with that, we bid adieu.

In recent years, the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) has faced significant scrutiny regarding its effectiveness in combating crime, despite its ambitious pledges outlined in the party manifesto. With Prime Minister Philip Davis emphasizing three key priorities—crime, the economy, and education—many expected a strong and proactive response to the escalating crime rates. However, the reality has been far from the promises made.

In its manifesto, the PLP made three bold pledges aimed at addressing the crime crisis that has plagued the nation. These included:

1. Increased Law Enforcement Resources**: Promising to bolster police forces with more officers, funding, and advanced technology to tackle crime more effectively.

2. Community Engagement Programs**: The party committed to creating initiatives focused on community engagement, aiming to build trust between law enforcement and local communities.

3. Legislative Reforms**: The PLP vowed to introduce tougher legislation targeting repeat offenders and enhancing penalties for violent crimes.

Despite these pledges, the party has struggled to deliver on its promises, raising questions about its commitment and ability to implement meaningful change.

In January 2023, Prime Minister Davis then went on to recommit to these previous unfilled promises, he said ; “Economy, crime and education, key areas of focus over the next 12 months” – In this article, Prime Minister Davis once again referred to the Progressive Liberal Party’s (PLP) manifesto, “Blueprint for Change”. In an attempt to further reassure the public that although the crime situation looked dismal he had not forgotten his promise.

All I can say is fool me once………..

Then in the January, 2024, Prime Minister Davis, came back out with an aggressive pronouncement warning criminals; “Bahamas Prime Minister warns criminals, we are coming for you”

When Prime Minister Davis addressed the nation, he highlighted the urgent need for a unified approach to crime, stating, “We are coming for you,” directly aimed at criminals. This fiery rhetoric was intended to bolster public confidence and demonstrate a tough stance on crime. However, the effectiveness of such statements has been undermined by the lack of tangible results and alleged questionable behavior by some members of the Royal Bahamas Police Force (RBPF).

While strong words can rally support and create a sense of urgency, they must be backed by action. The citizens of the nation have not seen a significant reduction in crime rates, nor have they felt the promised increase in safety. This disconnect between rhetoric and reality has led to growing frustration and distrust among the citizens.

While making the bold pronouncement Prime Minister Davis emphasized the importance of the economy and education in his address. However, the interconnection between these issues cannot be overlooked. High crime rates often stem from socioeconomic challenges, including lack of education and limited job opportunities.

The PLP’s failure to address these underlying issues has further compounded the crime problem. Without a holistic approach that includes economic development and educational initiatives, the fight against crime cannot be won. The party’s inability to integrate its crime-fighting strategies with broader social reforms has left many feeling that the promises made were merely political rhetoric rather than a genuine plan for change.

As the PLP continues to navigate its challenges, it is crucial for party leaders to reflect on the commitments made and the expectations set. The fight against crime requires not just pledges, but a sustained effort, innovative strategies, and accountability for results, none of which we have seen to date.

The citizens deserve to see real progress in their safety and security, and it is the responsibility of the PLP to ensure that their promises translate into meaningful action. Moving forward, a renewed focus on community engagement, economic development, and educational reform will be essential in restoring faith in the party’s ability to combat crime effectively.

In the coming months, it will be vital for the PLP to demonstrate that they can transform their pledges into action, or risk totally losing the trust of the very people they aim to protect but on their current course, they do not seem to be headed in the right direction.

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) continues to fail for one reason, it is their nature.

END

#THENEWDAYOLDWAYPLP

This past week, the Bahamian people were treated to another display of confusion from the New Day, Old Way, Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government. It’s like they’re on a mission to baffle and disappoint us at every turn.

First on the agenda was the passing of the Cannabis Bill. Now, if you were able to understand it, you were left very disappointed.  But for the rest of us mere mortals, it was a mind-boggling disappointment. I mean, what did we really expect from the source of this legislation?

And then there’s the situation at Bahamas Power and Light (BPL). The government is all gung-ho about signing over 50% of the power company to some new private group that has teamed up with a foreign power company. They’re calling it a “transformation” of the power company, but please, let’s not use the word “privatization.” Because, you know, it’s not privatization if we say it isn’t, right?

What’s truly amazing is that these grand plans seem to conveniently forget about the people who will actually be doing the work to bring about this so-called “transformation.” It’s as if they believe it will magically happen without any input from the hardworking individuals who keep the lights on.

But let’s move on to the real gem of the week – Prime Minister Philip Davis K.C.’s disclosure that his government has entered into an agreement with a non-profit to potentially sue firearm dealers. Yes, you heard that right. They want to sue the National Rifle Association (NRA) for illegal guns on our streets. Because, apparently, the United States government itself has been totally incapable of holding the NRA accountable for gun violence on their own turf, just let that sink in a minute.

Now, I’m not saying this because it’s a PLP initiative. No, no. I’m saying this because it makes absolutely no sense and has the potential to cost us taxpayers a boatload of money. The gun manufacturers have the backing of the NRA, and the United States government has failed miserably in reining them in. So why on earth does our government think they can succeed where the USA has failed?

And let’s not forget the needless risks involved in this case. If the Bahamas government’s lawsuit is unsuccessful, guess who’s left holding the bag? That’s right – us taxpayers. We’ll be on the hook for our own legal fees and those of the non-profit. Talk about a fool’s errand.

Instead of wasting our hard-earned money on this misguided venture, why not invest in social programs for our youth? Especially our young men who are in desperate need of guidance and support. Let’s teach them the value of human life and provide them with anger management skills. And while we’re at it, let’s also reach out to the parents who may be struggling to deal with difficult situations.

Suing the United States is not a “Brave” move; it’s a futile one. I’d really love to know who is advising Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis on this matter. Are they convincing him that this actually makes sense? Or is he trying to prove to the United States that he’s just as “brave” as they are? Either way, it’s a clear demonstration of the PLP’s nature – a nature that fails us time and time again.

So, let’s put an end to this fool’s errand and focus on initiatives that will actually benefit our country and its people. It’s time for the PLP to step up and lead with intelligence, not confusion.

END

#THENEWDAYOLDWAYPLP

In today’s edition of the My Morning Paper, we look into the recent statements made by National Security Minister, the Hon. Wayne Munroe, and his affiliation with the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP). Upon closer examination, it becomes evident that there may be a larger issue at hand than initially perceived.

To understand the context, it is important to explore the reasons behind Mr. Munroe’s departure from the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) to join the PLP. An article from The Tribune on September 10, 2015, sheds light on this matter. In the article, Mr. Munroe explains that he aligned himself with the PLP because he believes their philosophy is more aligned with the future direction of The Bahamas.

While Mr. Munroe’s rationale for joining the PLP may seem plausible, it is worth noting that the party’s philosophy has deviated from its original principles over time. The New Day Progressive Liberal Party government, which they claim to represent, often exhibits a sense of infallibility. Any criticism directed towards them is either attributed to external factors or dismissed as a misunderstanding. The discrepancy between the party’s stated philosophies and their actual practices raises questions about their effectiveness in governing.

The issue at hand is further highlighted in a recent article from The Tribune, titled “Munroe says he always had faith in police force.” The article discusses Mr. Munroe’s shifting stance on the ability of the police to investigate themselves. Prior to assuming his role as National Security Minister, Mr. Munroe advocated for independent investigations of police-involved killings. However, after assuming office, he expressed unwavering support for the police’s ability to handle such matters, despite public skepticism.

The contrasting positions taken by Mr. Munroe raise concerns. Why should his tone drastically change now that he has the authority to effect change? Furthermore, what concrete changes has he brought about in his role as National Security Minister?

It appears that Mr. Munroe’s alignment with the PLP is based on philosophies that the party itself has already abandoned since the departure of the Dissent Eight. This group, including one individual who refused to be a “yes man” to the party leader and prime minister at the time, Sir Lynden, signifies a significant shift in the PLP’s values.

It is clear from Mr. Munroe’s statements that he has fully embraced the “new” ways of the PLP and has become a staunch supporter of their agenda. However, this raises concerns about his objectivity and independence, as he appears to be a “yes man” for the New Day government. The resemblance between the current government and the “Old PLP” cannot be ignored.

It is worth noting that the Minister of National Security should exercise caution and restraint in his public statements. More often than not, his attempts to showcase his intelligence only serve to embarrass himself and potentially undermine the credibility of the PLP. The underlying nature of the Progressive Liberal Party seems to be the root cause of their failures.

Let me end here, the affiliation of National Security Minister Wayne Munroe with the Progressive Liberal Party raises questions about the party’s values, the alignment of its members, and the effectiveness of its governance. The contradictions and inconsistencies in Mr. Munroe’s positions further highlight the need for transparency and accountability within the party.

END

#THENEWDAYOLDWAYPLP

Behold the grand spectacle of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and its unwavering devotees, who proclaim with fervor that this political powerhouse, established 71 years ago in 1953, has never faltered—a feat truly worth marveling at.

Today, the Chairman of the PLP, the indomitable Fred Mitchell, known to some as “Snagglepuss”, has unleashed his fury upon the organizers of the Vertical Blue free diving competition, staunchly defending the party’s impeccable track record.

The competition, a fixture at Dean’s Blue Hole on Long Island for the past 16 years, has been abruptly suspended due to the island’s woeful infrastructure, as lamented by Director William Trubridge.

Trubridge painted a grim picture, stating, “It is now common for utilities to have outages for the majority of the day, occasionally for weeks on end. Roads have deteriorated to the point where it is unsafe for them to be driven on. Where there were once three commercial airlines servicing the island, with a minimum of two flights a day, there is now a single inconsistent carrier that … is often booked out.”

One might have expected the New Day government to spare no effort in preserving such a prestigious event in The Bahamas, particularly given its alignment with the Blue and Orange economy initiatives outlined in the government’s manifesto. But alas, the Chairman, in his unwavering loyalty to the party and the government, chose to shield their reputation at all costs—even if it meant sacrificing the event. As always, the blame is deflected, and the PLP remains unblemished and infallible since its inception in 1953.

The Nassau Guardian reports on Mitchell’s scathing response to the canceled freedive event on Long Island, where he absolves the government of any culpability. Mitchell dismisses Trubridge’s concerns as the grievances of a failed promoter seeking to shift blame onto The Bahamas for his own shortcomings.

Trubridge’s letter cited a litany of infrastructure woes on Long Island, including power and water outages, decrepit roads, and limited flight options hindering athlete travel. Despite the significant economic contribution of the event to Long Island, Trubridge lamented the government’s lack of support and basic infrastructure upkeep.

It would have been reasonable to expect the government to address these issues, not only for the benefit of event organizers and participants but also for the residents of Long Island. Yet, Mitchell’s unwavering defense of the government’s honor persists, even as critical voices grow louder.

In a puzzling turn, Mitchell veers off course to address the case of missing American transgender woman Taylor Casey, diverting attention from the pressing issues at hand. His failure to acknowledge and address the reasons behind the event’s cancellation only underscores his unsuitability for frontline politics.

As the PLP continues to stumble due to its inherent nature, one cannot help but question the party’s leadership and its priorities. In a realm where accountability and responsibility are scarce commodities, the Progressive Liberal Party stands as a stark reminder of the perils of unchecked power and hubris.

The PLP fails for one reason, it is their nature.

End.

It is being reported that Prime Minister Philip Davis; Secret Squirrel, has directed the appointment of a foreign independent investigator the inquiry into allegations against Chief Superintendent Michael Johnson, officer if charged of the Criminal Department.

My first thought is to enquire whether Secret Squirrel is only now finding out about these allegations, which would not surprise many, but we know that he has been aware of this developing saga, so my other thought is that he has been forced to act based on the negative attention that this story is getting especially since the shooting of the self-appointed “whistle blower” this past weekend.

“Accusation involving senior officer terribly disturbing” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “PRIME Minister Philip “Brave” Davis said he found voice notes purporting to capture a quid-pro-quo arrangement involving a senior police officer and a gang leader “terribly disturbing”.

“We want to ensure that we restore the confidence of Bahamian people in our police force because there are many good police officers that are doing a wonderful job in protecting our property, our lives, and our country and citizens,” he exclusively told The Tribune Tuesday night. “We need to ensure that we get to the bottom of whatever the tapes mean, and to ensure the confidence, I’m advised that they will be calling in assistance so that there will be not only a semblance but an actual independent review.”

Mr. Davis said he could not give more information about the involvement of foreign investigators.

“I’m leaving that to the investigators, and I want them to set the parameters, but I want to make sure that what happened, that we get to the bottom of it all and that the confidence of the Bahamian people in the police force has been restored,” he said.

He said it is “quite alarming” that many Bahamians do not trust the police force to investigate the matter probably because it involves a senior officer.

“We have to appreciate that we’re all humans, we make mistakes, we have to understand what’s going on and where the bad apples exist, we have to weed them out,” he said. “The overall goal is to find the truth and let the chips fall where they may and any persons who are culpable, they should be brought to justice.”

First it is interesting the prime minister finds it “quite alarming’ that many Bahamians do not trust the police force to investigate the matter, maybe it is time that someone brings him up to speed on the fact that a lot of Bahamians simply do not trust the police. Then there is this last paragraph which is a bit unsettling; the prime minister first states that “we all makes mistakes” but as if he is suggesting that the country be more understanding of such instances but then goes on to say what most of the country is already saying; “weed them out” and bring them to justice, so all of the eloquent verbiage is very unnecessary.

So, while the Secret Squirrel was leading us to where we already were; his Chairman and Minister for Foreign Affairs; Fred Mitchel [Snagglepuss], was busy seeming to undermine the prime minister with his own message, which was simply one to contradict the Hon. Michael Pintard, the Leader of the Opposition; Free national Movement (FNM) – or in other words, simply being the ball of contradiction that Snagglepuss has become known to be.

“Mitchell dismisses calls for commission of inquiry into police operations” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article;

“The Royal Bahamas Police Force (RBPF) was “read the riot act” over serious allegations that led to the head of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) Chief Superintendent Michael Johnson being sent on garden leave pending an investigation, Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell said yesterday.

Mitchell said the country’s leaders are taking the claims seriously but dismissed calls from the Free National Movement (FNM) for a commission of inquiry or for foreign law enforcement agencies to step in and investigate.

“We are now faced with a set of allegations [that] go to the root of law enforcement capabilities,” said Mitchell in a voice note released on Independence Day.

“We have gone down this road before and one thing we know is that in order to achieve justice and equity, you don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

“The government has been looking into the performance of the force since it came to office. Looking at its management, looking at its future and where it’s headed.

“… Our friends in the FNM always have this knee-jerk reaction to call in foreigners to clean up the mess. But we may say this: this is The Bahamas.

“When we accepted the responsibility of independence, we took on the responsibility of managing and solving our own problems. The rules in this matter have so far been followed and they will be followed. The decisions must be evidence-based and not by some cockamamie suppositions and conjecture.”

Indeed, Mr. Mitchell we have accepted the responsibility of independence and managing and solving our own problems but there are instances where outside help is needed and/or, to avoid the appearance of impropriety and conflict of interest and I think that even you would understand understands this concept but there seems to be such a great distain for the opposition that you are willing to go against your very own leader and “throw the baby out with the bath water”, exactly what you accuse the leader of the opposition of doing; so just contrary, even to commonsense.

As the chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) seems to not see the potential tremendous backlash of this entire situation; the international papers are now erroneously binding the Taylor Casey case and to the allegations of corruption in in the Royal Bahamas Police Force (RBPF); the very tenuous link being that the police force is so corrupt it is unable to conduct a proper investigation.

 It would appear that the chairman of the PLP’s great distain for the opposition Free National Movement (FNM), and him attempting to ‘save’ the PLP from “them”, has him so blinded that he would even risk the reputation of The Bahamas and just like that the “baby and the bathwater gone out the window.

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is their nature; maybe now two, because of the myopic and bitter approach that its chairman has taken to politics.

END

“Ah, relief at last! Families can finally afford groceries, school supplies, and other essentials without breaking the bank,” declared Prime Minister Philip Davis, aka Secret Squirrel. The money saved will be funneled back into local businesses, giving the economy a much-needed boost. Sounds great, right?

Let’s rewind a bit. When the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) took office, there was this nifty fuel hedging program in place at BPL. It was a sweet deal, letting The Bahamas buy fuel at a fixed, lower cost. But then, the New Day PLP government came in almost three years ago and, in their infinite wisdom, decided not to renew this program. Surprise, surprise—electricity costs soared! At first, they played dumb, but eventually, they had to own up to the blunder. By then, though, the damage was done.

Fast forward to today, and the same New Day PLP government is telling everyone, “Check your bills at the end of July.” Oh, joy.

Now, not to be labeled “ungrateful” for the umpteenth time today, but I’ve got a couple of burning questions. First off, what exactly is this magical plan that the New Day government and the Minister for Energy and Transport, Jobeth Colbey-Davis (aka Theodora Elphaba), have cooked up to lower our energy costs?

The devil is always in the details; maybe they are trying to save us from these “devils” by now sharing these details and maybe we should be grateful for the kind consideration of our souls.

And second, will these new rates actually be lower than what we had under the old fuel hedging program, courtesy of the former Free National Movement (FNM) administration?

The last thing we want—scratch that, the very last thing we want—is to feel like we’ve been swung by our “caring government” in some crafty con. Imagine if they let our bills skyrocket just to bring them back down to where they originally were under the hedging program, all so they could claim, “Look, another campaign promise fulfilled!” That, my friends, would be downright wicked and deceitful.

END

#THENEWDAYOLDWAYPLP

Prime Minister Davis, “Secret Squirrel”, brags about how his travels has repaired The Bahamas’ relationships around the world. He goes on to claim how he is bringing foreign investors to the country; but what are his goverment’s economic initiatives affecting the relationship between his New Day government and local businesses?

First, I would like to interject my suggestion that there were no foreign relationships to be repaired; to be repaired they would have first to be broken and I dare Secret Squirrel or any one of his government or even fervent supporters, helping to spread this version of “reality” to provide any concrete and concise evidence to prove my assertions erroneous.

‘Barbaric’ govt task force blasted” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article; “The government yesterday faced increased criticisms over the work of the Maritime Revenue Enhancement Task Force with the Bahamas Chamber of Commerce and Employers’ Confederation (BCCEC) expressing concern over the “contempt” being shown for the business community through “invasive inspection strategies”, and one businessman branding as “barbaric, mindless and completely archaic” the work of the team of law enforcement and government officials.

Meanwhile, Acting Press Secretary Keishla Adderley told reporters the government was reviewing the procedures used by the task force after Vice President of CBS Bahamas Brent Burrows II complained of armed officers entering their Southwest Plaza store unannounced to review the company’s files.

The task force’s mandate is to ensure that companies are compliant with all taxes.

The team includes officials from the departments of inland revenue, immigration and customs, the National Insurance Board, and police and defense force officers.”

While it is my opinion and that of most Bahamians that each and every business and person should comply with our tax laws, it is also my opinion that there is no need for excessive and invasive force as a means to have businesses comply, like simply having them shut down until they choose to comply, and while people may still complain, this move is a far less invasive and excessive means in my opinion.

During the lockdowns brought about by the pandemic, there was excessive force used in several instances to have people comply with the law at that time.  It was and still isa my opinion that in a civilized society, a certain level of discretion should be afforded to its citizens especially by those enforcing the law, this is the only way that we maintain a healthy and cohesive society and remain truly progressive as a country.

So your methods to achieve this simply cannot be that which can only be perceived as pure and utter madness, then labelled as justifiably or unjustifiably as “barbaric”.

So to use the reasoning/excuse, you feel free to interject the most appropriate word that works for you here; “With regard to the armed officers, Bowleg explained that the team is a revenue collection team and needs to be protected as its members carry out their duty of collecting the government’s revenue.”, it very difficult to believe  and only seen as an excuse to attempt to justify the use of excessive and aggressive force in order to “review the company’s files”, when there are more less aggressive and excessive force available to agents of the government while “collecting government’s revenue” and at the end of this excessive and aggressive exercise, did the relevant agencies succeed in the purpose of the visit?

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason; it is their nature.

END