“Sands ‘deviated’ from contract procedure – Minister denies the was ‘out to get’ Frank Smith” – The Nassau Guardian – Tuesday, September 11, 2018

Excerpt from this article; “Health Minister Dr. Duane Sands admitted yesterday on the stand that he ‘deviated’ from normal procedure when he approved the award of a 1.8 million cleaning contract to Magic Touch Company which is owned by Barbara Hanna.

Sands made the admission during cross examination in the briery and extortion trail of former Public Hospital Authority (PHA) Chairman Frank Smith.

Hanna has alleged that Smith demanded and received $60,000 from her, from 2016 to 2017; after he allegedly helped her company win a contract to clean the Critical Block of Princess Margaret Hospital.

Smith has denied the charges.

It was previously revealed in court that Hanna was awarded a second contract in 2017, valued at $1.8 million, three months after Smith was charged.

The contract was awarded, according to the minutes from the PHA board, without approval from the board.  The board did approve it later.

Last Tuesday, it was noted that Sands approved the second contract for Hanna following a recommendation from PHA’s tender analysis committee and a legal opinion from the Attorney General.

During his testimony last week, Sands said Hanna who donated $300 to his election campaign to 2016, alleged she was making monthly cash payments of $5,000 to Smith and that she asked for help.  Sands said he told Hanna to go to the police.”

What I have found amazing about the way in which this trail has unfolded is the manner in which the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) has been able to shift the focus of this case from the allegations of bribery and extortion by former PHA Chairman Frank Smith to one where we now have Dr. Duane Sands, the present Minister of Health services being “bought” for the sum of three hundred dollars [$300].

So a donation of $300 was made during the he lead up to the last general election and from this we are being asked to connect the following dots; one, that Dr. Sands had foreknowledge that he would win the Elizabeth seat, that the Free National Movement (FNM) would win the general election and that he would be made Minister of Health because only with these three things happening would he ever have the opportunity to ‘go after’ Frank Smith.

Then we look at this $300 dollars that the minister is said to have sacrificed his political and medical career for, we wonder what about the money that brought this case about in the first place, the $600,000 [six hundred thousand dollars], a quick look through Ms. Wilson’s financials would easily prove this but then there has been an objection by the defense to the introduction of Hanna’s banking information, imagine that.

But then there is this lie that the health minister has been caught in right?

While the Dr. Sands admits to deviating from contract procedure, I ask two questions;

1. Did he have the authority to ‘deviate’ from contract procedure? And
2. Did he do anything illegal when he did, given the circumstances? The circumstance as explained by him but which has been totally glossed over was the immediate need for someone to clean the hospital.

At this point, the major issue is that Dr. Sands has proven to be a horrible witness, it is that simple and there are two things at play here.  The allegations of extortion and bribery by Frank Smith of Barbara Hanna and Dr. Sands deviating from contract procedure; one of these issues has been answered with a plausible explanation while the other has been answered by attempting to make this deviation more nefarious that it is really is and to make it seem more salacious than the claim of bribery and extortion.

The funny thing about the entire situation is that only the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) would even consider being brought for $300 because this is something that they would do, as it is their nature.

END                                                                                                                                       

“Govt. Purchases Grand Lucayan Resort” – The Tribune 22. Aug. 2018

Excerpt from this article; “The Minnis administration has purchased the Grand Lucayan resort in Grand Bahama, Prime Minister Dr. Hubert Minnis announced after a tour of the property on Wednesday.

During a press conference on the island, Dr. Minnis said the government made a deposit of $10 million on the property. The full purchase price is $65 million on the property, Dr. Minnis said.

Dr. Minnis said it is not the government’s intention to run the hotel, saying it is his administration’s intent to save jobs, saying if the three-property would close, it would have a ‘devastating’ impact on Grand Bahama.

He said the government was ‘holding’ the property to preserve the island’s economy and as soon as possible, the hotel would be sold.”

 I read this article and thought while the government’s intentions may be good; the holistic approach to the goal of preserving ‘the islands economy’ could not be realized by the simple act of buying the resort.  So I waited for the opposition Progressive Liberal Party to interject a more viable solution to the issue and got the leader of the PLP, Philip ‘Brave Davis’ suggesting that the purchase of the resort would be a ‘a waste of money’ without giving any viable solution to the economic woes that face the island of Grand Bahama but then why should I expect vision from a set of people that only increased the cost of government on that island during their last years in office, which did nothing to lessen the problems of that island, really not surprised by their lack of vision but then enters Maurice Glinton with his opinion, with most of us being like, “WHO?”

“Lawyer says resort’s purchase unlawful” – The Tribune 6 Sept 2018

Excerpt for this article; “ATTORNEY Maurice Glinton QC believes the Minnis administration’s purchase of the Grand Lucayan resort is unlawful.

In a recent written opinion price, he described the purchase as evidence that the government’s ‘decision making process-making process (or lack thereof) is critically impaired’.

‘By that’, he noted, ‘I mean ‘flawed’ for not obviously being informed as such process must be by views of proximate stakeholders consulted on the practicality and legality of an acquisition that will make The Bahamas government a licensee of Grand Bahama Port Authority Limited entitled to enjoy the benefits and privileges in virtue of the 1955 Hawksbill Agreement and the subsequent 1960 and 1966 amended agreements, all statutory in nature as enabled by Acts of the Bahamian Parliament.”  As I listen to Mr. Glinton’s contribution I first wonder where did he come from but at the very least he brought to the forefront what I feel may the problem here, which in my opinion is the Grand Bahama Port Authority.

Although I understand why the Minnis administration has committed to the purchase of the Grand Lucayan resort, I do not feel that it was the most prudent move in this case because of the economic strangle hold that the Port Authority has on the Freeport area; my solution is a simply this, if the Port continues to be the problem as it pertains to the economic advancement of Grand Bahama, then put them out of business or just work them out of the equation and the only way that I can see this being done is by shifting the economic focus of Grand Bahama from the city of Freeport to East End or West End, preferably West end.

It has been speculated that the purchase of the resort will be financed by the Chinese government, who currently own the resort; so borrowing from them to buy and fix a property that they seem uninterested in makes no sense to me, so I simply suggest that the government take that money to build a new hotel and casino with airport in the east or west and allow the current owners of the Grand Lucayan to unload the property while they continue to pay extra  taxes to the Port Authority.

There was a recommendation by former Prime Minister, the Hon. Hubert Ingraham for the government to buy the Port Authority instead of the resort but are the Haywards and St. George families even willing to sell, I doubt it, it is a sure ‘pay check’.

I say then force the families into a timey ‘death’ and go in and purchase the Port for pennies on the dollar and then dismantle it because it has long served its purpose for the island of Grand Bahama and the Freeport area and only now serves to make the ease of business in that area that much more difficult and another advantage of building a new hotel with its own airport, beside shifting the economic focus of the island, would be that if you are serious about selling the resort because you do not want to be in the hotel business, would be that the allure of a new resort is much more attractive to an investor.

END

 

“Anger On The Roads Over New University Crossing” – The Tribune, 31^st August 2018

Except from this article; “MOTORISTS stuck in long lines of traffic were confused and angered yesterday by the newly installed HAWK pedestrian signal crosswalk on University Drive.

As several students have been hit crossing the street between the Michael Eldon Building and the main University of The Bahamas campus, officials said it adds a safety mechanism for students who need to cross the street.

But because the new system’s traffic light does not ever change to green to signal when they could go, some driver did not know if and when it was safe to drive through the crossing.

Others did not acknowledge the system’s flashing lights and drove through the pedestrian’s markings as some students were crossing.

On the other hand, most students were not using the system properly and did not wait for the ten second system countdown for the walk signal.

The chaos this created yesterday led many motorists to voice their frustrations and honk their horns, telling reporters they had no idea how the new system was to work.

Generally, they all agreed this would create a daily nightmare in the area.”

I find it disheartening that in this day and age we are even having this conversation of how do we get university across the street safely and if my commentary seems to be insensitive then maybe it is supposed to be.

I have always found this area to be an area to avoid when the university was in session because the entire situation could make the most ‘saved’ lose their religion because it is as if the university students treat that section of street as if it is ‘pedestrian only’, having no consideration for motorists, so there is already a certain level of animosity between the driving public and the students and the only way that I feel that this situation can be resolved is by the students first having some common sense on how to use a crosswalk in the first place because until they are able to grasp the concept of how to use a simple crosswalk; the more advanced system of HAWK (High-Intensity Activated crosswalk) is lost on them, as it has already been reported that there is some level of confusion on how the system works.

“As several students have been hit crossing the street…”? Really? I don’t mean to sound insensitive, or maybe I do, but even the ‘potcake’ has seemed to figure out a way to safety cross the street but then many of them are running when they see a chance to get across ,so could this be the solution?  Does the University of The Bahamas have to introduce a course on how to cross the street; “Crossing the Street 100 – How to Safely Cross the street”

Before I leave, driving down Carmichael Road this morning I saw a school child attempting to cross the street where there is NO crosswalk; she came to a STOP, waited until the traffic STOPPED and HUSTLED across the street; maybe I should have videotaped it for the university students.

END

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Turnquest, Cooper offer opposing views on Moody’s unchanged rating” – The Nassau Guardian, Business

Excerpt from this article; “Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Peter Turnquest said in a statement on Tuesday that credit rating agency Moody’s unchanged rating for The Bahamas at Baa3 with a negative outlook, reflects stabilization in the country’s credit profile.

However, Exuma and Ragged Island Member of Parliament Chester Cooper, who is the opposition shadow minister for finance, said the unchanged rating indicates Moody’s lack of confidence in the government’s efforts to improve the economy in any significant way.

In a credit opinion issued on Tuesday, Moody’s held its existing credit rating, citing the country’s weak economic strength and increased debt and interest burdens as factors for its decision.

The credit opinion warned that the country could face a downgrade in the next year to year-and-a-half if the government’s fiscal consolidation efforts do not ‘reduce deficits to levels that  would reverse the trend of rising debt ratios and lead to a stabilization in the government’s debt ratio.”

So we have one report and two different opinions; of course we all would expect Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance; the Hon. Peter Turnquest to see the “glass as half full’, as he defends the efforts of the governing Free National Movement (FNM) to bring the country’s finances under control and yes, we would expect the Hon. Chester Cooper, Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) member of parliament for Exuma and Ragged Island and the opposition’s shadow minister of finance to see the glass as “half empty”, as he attempts to discredit the government’s efforts but Mr. Cooper needs to be very careful as in doing so he is possibly exposing the former Progressive Liberal Party government for the inept, incompetent and lazy government that led to their crushing defeat at the polls in the last general election.

Indeed, Mr. Cooper needs to be very careful and first enquire as to why the glass was “half empty” and in need of ‘repair’ (stabilization) in the first place.  I suggest he looks at the country’s finances during the period the 2012 – 2017 where the country went through four downgrades, a period of time that Mr. Cooper seems to be unaware of, to help him get a better understanding of what is actually is going on today.

While both views may be technically correct about the glasses capacity and present state, the fact is  that it is now stabilized at half its capacity and not set to lose anymore of its content if the present government does not stray away from its current path of fiscal responsibility; so while, Mr. Copper may technically be correct in saying “Rating indicates Moody’s lack of confidence in govt’s effort to improve economy”, he must also admit that ‘something’ right has been done to keep the credit rating stabilized and only time can speak to whether his assessment of Moody’s rating opinion holds any merit.

END

It appears that Attorney Fred Smith QC and the group “Rights Bahamas” is “hell bent” on creating more problems within the Bahamian society than they seek to solve and the question is, to what end?  What exactly is their ‘end game’?  Because right now their agenda does not seem to be to the betterment of those whom they claim to defend.

“RIGHTS BAHAMAS PLANS TO TAKE SHANTY TOWN CASE INTERNATIONAL”

Excerpt from press statement; “Human rights group Rights Bahamas is planning to take its shanty town case to the International community, attorney Fred Smith QC, told The Tribune on Friday.

Speaking outside the swearing-in-ceremony of Chief Justice Stephen Isaacs, Mr. Smith described the government’s actions against shanty towns as an attempt to ‘ethnically cleanse’ the country of these villages.

On August 5, the Supreme Court ordered the government and utility providers to halt any planned service disconnections or evictions in shanty towns pending a judicial review of the Minnis administration’s policy to eradicate those communities.

Supreme Court Justice Cheryl Grant-Thompson granted the interlocutory injunction blocking evictions and service disconnections just days ahead of the government’s August 10 deadline during a telephone conference with human  right attorney Fred Smith QC, and Attorney General Carl Bethel on Saturday.

On Wednesday, Mr. Bethel told the Senate the government has hired a team of high-powered lawyers headed by Harvey Tynes, QC, to take on Mr. Smith and his team in the matter.

The next day, Rights Bahamas, of which Mr. Smith is the former president, released a statement criticizing the government’s intention to pay lawyers outside the Office of the Attorney General, calling it a ‘waste’ of money.

When asked what the next steps are regarding this legal action, Mr. Smith said: ‘Rights Bahamas is going to the United nations Humans Rights Council and also to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to also present to the international world this terrible attempt to ethnically cleanse the Bahamas of villages composed mainly of people whose heritage is Haitian.”

So now Rights Bahamas has to lay out its case; which is that The Bahamas government is seeking to ethnically cleanse the country of these villages which it just may be doing, as Mr. Smith plays his words game with the term “ethnically cleanse”, seeking to suggest that the government is attempting to rid the country of an entire sector of actually persons, while the government merely seeks to regulate these shanty towns and bring them up to standard worthy of human habitation, why is Mr. Smith distracting from this fact?  Is it because it simply does not serve his narrative what is his narrative?

Mr. Smith must realize that ALL residents of these shanty towns are being ‘targeted’ so for him to say “…..this government is targeting an ethnic community and it is an international crime to do this”, is misleading as it would suggest that only persons of Haitian heritage live in these shanty towns and are being unfairly targeted.

Mr. Smith and Human Rights speaks to the basic human rights and due process which must be afforded to any illegal migrant or anyone building illegally in these shanty towns but refuses to speak to any laws being broken by these persons and also glosses over the fact the nowhere has it been suggested that these persons would not be afforded their due process.

They have been given over eight months to prepare their cases, Mr. Smith is quite aware of this and is being extremely disingenuous as he wishes to present a case to save the way of life for people which he must even see and being substandard and even inhumane; even if most of them see this as a step up from where they have migrated. 

I ask Mr. Smith, why doesn’t Right Bahamas attempt to give those in these communities a hand up instead of fighting for them to continue to live a way of life which you would fight against if they were forced to live under these conditions?

As I have mentioned before, Mr. Smith seems to be going about bringing out wars without compromise, which only serves to further foment discord between Bahamians and Haitians, this is being seen in the case of the valedictorian of Doris Johnson High School who has been accepted by a number of colleges and has received partial scholarships and while we all wish to reward his excellence in academics the reality is that he may not get the chance because of his citizenship status.  At one time many Bahamians would have come to his aid and some still have, while others now take the unfortunate stance of “Why help a foreigner, when our own need help?”

END

 

“Long road ahead for Sir Lynden Pindling Estates residents” – The Nassau Guardian 5^th August 2014

Excerpt from this article; “Janet Munroe, a mother of five, has been living in Sir Lynden Pindling Estates for nearly 10 years.

Munroe, like hundreds of other residents in the area, is living on land that the Privy Council has ruled is owned by Arawak Homes.

The court last Tuesday upheld a Court of Appeal judgment, which affirmed Arawak Homes’ ownership of the property.

Last Wednesday, Arawak Homes President Franon Wilson said the company is giving the residents in the area 12 months to sort out their property titles.”

If I remember correctly these persons were native Bahamian citizens who seemed to have been taken advantage of by unscrupulous real estate agents who led them to legally build, to code on, land which the real estate agents had no rights to; did not own, so eventually the homeowners ended up losing their entire investments.  This was after a court battle to save their homes and after having lived in their homes for up to 10 years.

With this fresh in our mind, we will now come to the present; “INJUNCTED – Judge orders govt. to halt all shanty town clearances” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “THE SUPREME Court has ordered the government and utility providers to halt and planned service disconnections or evictions in shanty towns pending a judicial review of the Minnis administration’s policy to eradicate those communities.

Supreme Court Justice Cheryl Grant-Thompson granted the interlocutory[1] injunction blocking evictions and service disconnections just days ahead of the government’s August 10 deadline during a telephone conference with attorney Fred Smith, QC and Attorney General Carl Bethel on Saturday.

Leave for judicial review – file on behalf of 177 shanty town residents from both New Providence and Abaco, and non-profit group Respect Our Homes Ltd (ROHL) – was granted on Friday.

Shanty town residents are seeking to ventilate concerns the government’s eradication policy’ and subsequent evictions are unlawful, unconstitutional and motivated by ethnic discrimination without clear title to land ownership.”

So do Bahamian citizens have to form a non-profit group called Respect Our Country Ltd (ROCL) to bring about law and order in these matters and what exactly does “……ethnic discrimination to without clear title to land ownership” actually mean and how are these eviction being seen as unlawful and unconstitutional?

Does this mean that the government has failed to prove that these persons have illegally built on land that is not theirs?  Or that the persons who have built there are being ‘rewarded’ by not adhering to the laws of The Bahamas has it pertains to land ownership? 

Let me say that it is my opinion that if you are an illegal migrant you then no right to any land in The Bahamas, whether ownership is in question or not and also if you are a squatter, whose ownership is in question as is suggested here, just how long can you be allowed to go on because as in the case of Ms. Janet Munroe vs. Arawak Homes, ten years and an established life does not even give one ‘rights’.

So if you assume that these persons, be they Bahamians, legal migrants or illegal migrants, have built on private land as is being suggested by Fred Smith, then these persons must have gotten permission from the land owners to built illegal structures and if they have built on Crown Land without the permission of The Crown, doesn’t The Crown then have the right to bulldoze these homes if it sees fit?

END

[1] adjective

1.

LAW

(of a decree or judgment) given provisionally during the course of a legal action.

“an interlocutory injunction”

2.

rare

relating to dialogue.

 

“Davis Says Over-The Hill Bill Will Only Help Rich” – The Tribune Friday 27 July 2018

Excerpt from this article; “OFFICIAL Opposition Leader Philip Brave Davis yesterday branded the government’s touted Economic Zone Bill 2018 as ‘flawed’, adding the legislation in its current form will only boost the rich at the expense of the poor.

Instead of doing what its title suggests, Mr. Davis said the bill would create special ‘exploitation’ zones.

Speaking in the House of Assembly yesterday, the Progressive Liberal Party leader said the legislation fell ‘dangerously short’ of addressing the structural deficiencies of Over-the-Hill communities and did not do enough to tend to the lack of education, with which many there are challenged.

Before Davis’s critique, Tall Pines MP Donald Saunders blasted the opposition claiming their criticisms of the legislation were because the PLP felt its base being threatened.

He said for an organization that constantly spoke about the love for the poor and disenfranchised, the party had not done enough to help those in this category.

However, when Mr. Davis spoke he questioned several aspects of the Economic Empowerment Zone Bill.  He said it was more likely that wealthy investors would take advantage of its many concessions, which will ultimately adversely affect the very people who need assistance.

‘I recognize, Mr. Speaker, the urgent need to respond to the challenges of these communities,’ Mr. Davis said yesterday during his contribution to the debate.

‘We need a durable long-term solution to this situation.  However the prime minister’s highly touted concept of special economic zones is flawed, this Bill is flawed.’

‘Its chief flaw is that it offers further enrichment to the rich at the expense of the poor.  This initiative is what I call the cart before the horse.  It dangerously falls short of addressing the structural challenges plaguing the Over-the-Hill communities,’ Mr. Davis said.”

So while the Member of Parliament for Englerston is spreading misinformation that the constituency that she represents has been left out of the initial zone suggesting that she has been discriminated against, Mr. Davis is attempting to make a case for why he feels the entire initiative is a bad idea and at the same time admitting that these areas that were once considered Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) strong-holds for decades are failing and that they [the ] Progressive Liberal Party] have failed them even after promising to invest in them.

It is amazing the manner in which Mr. Davis addresses the issue of the Economic Empowerment Bill, while attempting to “stand strong” for the people that actually live in an improvised state because he and his party have basically said there is nothing much that they could do or should do to help these people better their standard of living, this is evident in the statement; “The Over-the-Hill community and economic woes are long-standing and have been exacerbated by education and economic woes”, when exactly did Mr. Davis notice these problems?

I would suggest that he questions the viability of the Urban Renewal and Urban Renewal 2.0 programs to find the answers to the questions to find these answers.

While Mr. Davis looks for the answer to these simple questions, I would like to say of the Over-the-Hill Empowerment Bill, which Mr. Davis sees as the sky falling, here is an  opportunity for the persons in these areas who have moved out and left properties abandoned, to now come back and become owners of the economy by investing in generation properties. 

Now is the time for Bahamian citizens too band together and take full advantage of this opportunity, to improve their lives and the well-being and environments of the Over-the-Hill communities.

END                                                                                     

“NO role of DPP on social media war” – The Tribune 07.24.2018

Excerpt from this article; “PROGRESSIVE Liberal Party Chairman Fred Mitchell yesterday expressed shock over the government’s decision to refer a ‘simple social media, political war’ to the director of public prosecutions.

In a statement, Mr. Mitchell questioned the use of the state apparatus to investigate ‘some phantom alleged criminal behavior’, and suggested there was an agenda to intimidate PLP supporters.

He condemned the act as shameful and ‘nakedly political’, adding the party expected to see the specific directions given by the Attorney General Carl Bethel gazetted as required by law.

‘We think the real story here is the prosecution that were unleashed on PLP MPs; this is now victors justice again’, Mr. Mitchell said.

‘This reference to the DPP is designed to intimidate PLP partisan in their social media warfare against FNM trolls who continue to defame the PLP leaders.”

As Mr. Mitchell rambles on with, “we think the real story is the prosecutions that were unleashed on PLP MP; this is victors justice again.”, maybe he would like to explain to the rest of us exactly what he is referring to because I would like to just to note for the record that over 80 percent of the population is completely lost by the tenuous connection that he is attempting to make because as far as many of us are concerned he [Chairman Mitchell] has already showed his ‘cards’ with the comment suggesting that this is an “agenda to intimidate PLP supporters”, surely something else must be going on that most of us are unaware of or maybe this is all in Chairman Mitchell’s mind.

It is interesting that Chairman Mitchell would even get himself involved in such a ‘non-issue’ in the first place, as he labeled what is going on as nothing but “a simple social media war.”

The Chairman’s stance is that this issue should not have been forwarded to the director of public prosecutions; stating that “the [PLP] party expected to see the specific directions given by the Attorney General …..” suggesting at this point he is basing his entire opinion of the matter on two things; one, the theory that this is merely something orchestrated to ‘embarrass’ the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and two, pure speculation; as he does not give any plausible explanation as to why the matter should not have been referred to the DPP’s office.

Stripped back, there are allegations of numerous illegal activities, including murder which would be investigated in any other civilized society, is the Chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party then suggesting that we have not come far along in civility to investigate such matters just because his government decided not to carry out the necessary investigations in the Save The Bays matter?

From what I am understanding, the Attorney General has the right to refer a case to the office of the DPP and after a review the DDP can then refer the matter to the police for proper investigation if he deems it necessary but in this case certain recordings from social media were simply forward to the office of the DPP for him to do with as he pleased; no directive has been given to anyone at this point, so why I is the chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party getting ‘his drawers in a bunch’ over this ‘simple social media war’?  If it is as he says, it will run its course but to suggest that is should not be investigated shows a total lack of civility on the part of Chairman Mitchell and all of whom he speaks for.

Mr. Mitchell’s assertions that this is only attempt to intimidate PLP supporters is asinine, at best because while I may understand that he as chairman feel that he must make a comment on the matter I only ask that at the very least the statement makes a little bit of sense.

There is actually a simple solution to this issue and the chairman needs to think about simply solving the problem within his party while allowing the law to run its course.

END

 

“Miller could seek $70mi. – Lawyer for former MP warns govt. entity” – The Nassau Guardian; July 18^th, 2018

Excerpt from this article; “Former Tall Pines MP Leslie Miller could seek as much as $0 million in damages in his lawsuit against Bank of The Bahamas and the government, his attorney Damian Gomez said yesterday.

Miller is suing Bank of The Bahamas for $9, 642, 500.28 plus damages for alleged breach of contract with regard to seven companies financed by the bank, whose assets were transferred to Bahamas Resolve Limited, and since have been put on the market for sale.

Miller and his companies are also suing the attorney general and the treasurer of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas for $9,846,639.40 plus interest for failure to pay rent money he claims was due under five leases with the government signed December 1, 2016.

When asked about the issue of damages yesterday, Gomez said, ‘There is a claim against the government the Bank of The Bahamas for over $9 million and there is a separate claim against the government for rents that are due, and that’s just under $10 million.  He is also claiming in addition to those sums, damages, and those damages could amount to tens of millions, depending on what Bahamas Resolve does.”

‘It is now threatening to sell the properties.”

To tell the God’s honest truth, I am totally perplexed by this lawsuit and the grounds on which is based.

Here is what I know.

“Miller claims he financed the Summerwinds Complex through a mortgage at Bank of The Bahamas on August 4 1999.

He claims that he further added to that mortgage eight times over the next seven years until 2011 though loans to Summerwinds (Two Thousands) Investment Company Ltd (SICL).

He [Miller], was allowed by resolution of the House of Assembly on January 15, 2013 to lease his property to the government.

The government entered into two leases with SICL on May 7 2013 and July 19, 2013.

These leases required significant upgrades to the properties.

Miller claims the bank agreed to lend him $2.5 million through Summerwinds 2000 Investment Company for the upgrades of which $185,000 was advanced between February and October 2013.

Miller claims that during the first week of October, the bank stopped the payment of funds needed for the reminder of renovations, effectively breaching their contract and leading to the government cancelling the rental contracts because it could not occupy the premises.”

“….Miller claims and in February 2017, the treasurer failed to pay rent money agreed to in his leases, causing him and the company losses of $8,475,837.40 in rent and $1,370,802 in money ‘expended/committed’ for renovations – a total of $9,846,639.40.”

So If I understand what is going on here’ Mr. Leslie Miller, while being the Member of Parliament for Tall Pines for the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) financed the Summerwinds Complex in August of 1999 through the Bank of The Bahamas and proceeded to enter into two lease agreements with the government in 2013, which included a $2.5 million loan to renovate the building to be occupied by the government but the government at the time did not honor the agreement, a Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) of which he was a member of parliament but rather than sue that government for not being one of honor he has decided to sue the present government which has chosen to not be a part of the mess and rather go after the people’s money that was loan to Mr. Miller to renovate buildings to lease to the government – didn’t he and his government raise all eternal ‘hell’ about this with Dr. Minnis and his Stat Care building, something about ‘conflict of interest’ but here Mr. Miller seems all to willing “conflict interest”, borrow from the government, rent to the government in order to pay the government back and make a profit of course.

Is he [Mr. Miller] really suing for monies that he is says is owed to him due to the rent that he could have collected if his own ‘boys’ had not ‘screwed him over’?

But to move beyond the arrogance and politics of it, we find this culture prevalent wherein a person can actually take advantage of the system in this manner because of who they may be, while the average citizen must provide a “lung/kidney” donation and even a first born to be considered for a loan at half the amount and much less the risk, this is inherently wrong and this must be corrected for The Bahamas to advance.

We should all have a sense of true privilege in the country that we call home, not only the select few.

END

 

Pushed back on page eleven (11) of the Tribune, the chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), Senator Fred Mitchell makes a strange admission while attempting to ‘dress down’ the chairman of the Free National Movement (FNM) Carl Culmer.

“Mitchell: Culmer is an Uncle Tom” – The Tribune

Excerpt form this article; “PLP Chairman Fred Mitchell labeled his counterpart in the Free National Movement an ‘Uncle Tom’, condemning Mr. Culmer for accusing the PLP of oppressing generations of black Bahamians through its political ploys and practices.

In a statement, Mr. Mitchell asserted that Mr. Culmer continues to say ‘dumb and dumber things’.

Last week, Mr. Culmer said the PLP made the United Bahamian Party ‘look like monsters’.

‘This is a classic example of what is known as Uncle Tomism’, Mr. Mitchell said.

‘That means you blame the slave for being in their condition and you get one of their own to say so.”

What the chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party fails to understand or appreciate is that words matter and there are some listening to the language and words being used within this discourse, that is meant to embarrass the chairman of the Free National Movement and seeing a the quiet/subtle admission/concession that The Bahamas is not a free nation/society.  In this discourse is also the concession/admission by the chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party, the first black Bahamian government and who ushered in majority rule, that they have failed the people of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas, even after twenty-five (25) of consecutive of governance.

Word Matter; “This means you blame the slaves for being in their condition and you get one of their own to say so”, this in context, in July 2018, exactly, after celebrating forty-five (45) years of Independence, exactly who are the ‘slaves’?  And if there are ‘slaves’ there must be ‘slave masters’; who are these people?

Mr. Mitchell is simply showing his ignorance in this ‘row’ as “He continued: How can a modern Bahamian, presumably educated in our country as a result of the policies of the PLP, whose island elected representatives of the PLP to take the country into independence, who benefitted from a senior job in  a public corporation as a result if PLP policies, who lives in a free nation because of what the PLP did, whose very own FNM leaders were once PLP, speak such total and complete nonsense?”

Well, Senator Mitchell I ask how could just an “educated” man such as yourself that benefitted from all that you claim that Culmer benefitted from, say that that The Bahamas is a “free nation” but still imply that there are ‘slaves’ and by extension ‘slave masters’?

“That means that you blame the slave for being in their condition and you get one of their own to say so”

Words Matter.

Indeed, the chairman’s statements here are nonsensical, as usual I guess, as he cannot seem to expose the ‘ignorance’ of others without exposing his own.  Maybe he time would be better spent bring democracy to the party that he chairs, as there are suggestions that the Progressive Liberal Party’s constitution needs to be amended to bring democracy to that party.

END