People keep asking for the Free National Movement (FNM) to stop using the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) past performance or lack there off in office as an “excuse” to rationalize what the present government is doing but then the Progressive Liberal Party turns right around makes statements which are not familiar to or even closely acquainted with to the truth and I feel it is totally necessary to remind them of their past malfeasances that they perpetrated upon the people of The Bahamas.

“Darville hits out over proposed NHI tax”- The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article; “Progressive Liberal Party Senator Dr. Michael Darville has said the proposed two percent tax to fund National Health Insurance (NHI) would be an additional burden on the Bahamian people given the country’s economic state.

According to a policy paper released by the National Health Insurance Agency (NHIA) this week, employees would pay two percent of their salary to a maximum of $42 per month, with the employer paying the reminder premium.

The revamped NHI would cost taxpayers $100 million a year, according to Minister of Health Dr. Duane Sands.

In an interview with The Guardian, Darville said the Minnis administration should have followed the blueprint left by the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration with regard to NHI.”

As I slowly raise my hand to ask the most obvious question – ‘Exactly what plan do you refer to Senator Darville?’ I also ask for him to please not insult the intelligence of the Bahamian people; just stop it and keep this in the halls of the Progressive Liberal Party headquarters where it seems to be acceptable.

Further exception from this article; “The Christie administration introduced the enrollment and primary care phase of NHI in 2017.

It did so with no public insurer and no means of funding the program.

Back in February 2015, the opposition leader Dr. Hubert Minnis said his party will not support taxing Bahamians to fund NHI.

Pointing to these comments, Dr. Darville said ‘It’s very much [hypocritical].  What you are seeing now is pretty much the exact same blueprint the Progressive Liberal Party left behind, excerpt for the modality for payment and the fact that we made it empathically clear that we would not initiate a tax on the Bahamian people until we felt confident the economy could sustain it.”

Exactly what you saying here Senator Darville?

As I need clarification.

Senator Darville you state that “…..the Minnis administration should have followed the blueprint left by the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration with regards to NHI” but then go on to say; “what you are seeing now is pretty much the exact same blueprint the Progressive Liberal Party left behind except for the modality of payment….” First is it the same model or not and also Senator Darville no one in the previous Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government has ever said exactly how NHI would be funded, so there was no model of funding to follow although there was the intimation that there would have been a tax to fund the program in the original bill as introduced and passed by a Progressive Liberal Party government and then there is this curious and odd statement “…..until we [the Progressive Liberal Party] felt confident that the economy could sustain it [a tax to fund NHI” and I wonder exactly when that would have been because after four economic downgrades and the country slowly slipping toward a fourth, it did not seem that it would have been anytime soon under a Progressive Liberal Party government.

The Progressive Liberal Party government introduced the National Health Insurance plan in May of 2017 and at that time had no plan to fund it.  The Free National Movement (FNM) party came to power and continued to implement the program by upgrading medical facilities throughout the country and introducing the National Prescription Program.  The PLP then came back to power and from 2012-2017 did little to nothing to further advance NHI much less seek a way to fund the program but now Dr. Darville seeks to misguide with talks about a plan that he and his government had left in place.

In my opinion, the truth is that, the former Progressive Liberal Party administration never had a plan to fund the program beside taxation; they were just unable to given the way they ran the country’s economy but now they seek to demonize others for attempting to bring to fruition something that they were too lazy or too inept to bring about but will undoubtedly then seek to take full credit for when it is actually up and running.

In closing I would just like to say, it would have been advantageous for the previous Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration to have left a plan in place to fund this highly touted and anticipated initiative but unfortunately they did not.  Also, although as this tax has not been finalized, as the government is still in a period of consultation, the rumors of a tax so close to the increase of the VAT rate only serves the opposition message of “the war on the poor”

By the way, who contacted Senator Darville for serious and honest commentary on this subject in the first place?

THE END

It would seem that twice in one week the Bahamas Christian Council (BBC) has overstepped its bounds and gotten involved into areas the politics of the country which should not concern them, when or especially they seem to be failing at their very own role in society.

“You told us that you were broke” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article; “The government’s decision to buy the Grand Lucayan hotel for &65 million has reignited concerns regarding whether the 60 percent value-added tax (VAT) hike was necessary to dig the country out of debt as indicated by the government, Bahamas Christian Council President Delton Fernander said.

‘What I believe has happened in the short term is the message has been challenging,’ Fernander said.

‘You told us that we were broke,’ he continued, referring to the Minnis administration.

‘You told us about austerity measures, but yet we spend a tremendous amount of money, albeit to save our economy as is being purported.  But we are challenged now to stop and think: Was this to settle debt when taxes were raised or to put money in the kitty so that we could have it to spend?”

Bishop Fernander exactly what it that “they” who sent you want you to say?  I mean that you want to say here?

You indicate that you understand the austerity measures put in place and the purchase of the resort to ‘save the economy’ but at the last moment you pull back on that understanding, leaving others to wonder if you understand and believe the message that you have been sent to deliver, I mean which you wish to convey.

Earlier this week to sought to chastise the government for not assisting the nation of Haiti at this time but have yet to outline what the Christian community [Bahamas Christian Council] and the Church is doing to help and now again you seek to chastise the government but at this time the message given to you; I mean your message is unclear.

There seems to be an attempt to question where the money is coming from if the VAT rate was increased to service the national debt which would be a valid question if the BCC had not been caught asking the government to financially contribute to the efforts to aid the nation Haiti and this question that you seem to want to ask totally contradicts the question of was the tax hike necessary to help the country get out of debt. 

Do you need a moment to check with ‘the sender’ so that you may clarify your message?

As I end, I will return to the responsibility of the Church in society as I quote Mark 16:15; “Go ye into the world, and preach the gospel to every creature”, even if there are those among us that reject the Christian faith; wouldn’t it be your responsibility to at the very least show the benefits of living in harmony, while showing love and peace toward one another?

END

As the leader of the opposition Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Philip ‘Brave’ Davis objects to term limits for the prime minister post, the Chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), Senator Fred Mitchell announces the party’s upcoming convention for the PLP as the party seems to seek to change it public perception/image by making it seem to be democratic.

“PLP convention set for November” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article; “Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Leader Philip Brave Davis yesterday confirmed the party will host a convention ‘before the end of this year’ in alignment with the party’s constitution.

Davis said the details are expected to be discussed at the party’s leadership council this week, but PLP chairman Senator Fred Mitchell told The Guardian that the PLP will host a convention November 14-16 with all leadership positions up for grab”.

 

It is interesting that a political organization that held a convention in January 2017, months before the 2017 general election, its first convention since 2009, now seeks to have a convention almost every six months in order to seem democratic, while conceding to operating in an undemocratic manner for over eight years. 

What is more interesting is the fact that the people who seek to control this new and strange activity in the party are the very ones that were present the entire time as they violated their very own constitution; violating the rights of members of the party but isn’t this the very reason as to why the leader of the opposition objects to term limits for the office of the prime minister; “To legislate term limits may well be depriving the citizens of what they desire?”

Really, how do you now as the most undemocratic political organization in the country, now seek to pull the veil of democracy out at your convenience? 

We do not buy it.

So there we have it, a tale of a political organization which now attempts to dabble in democracy after having deprived its very own elected and paying members of their constitutional right to choose its leaders for years. 

As the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) sets yet another convention date, proclaiming “all leadership positions up for grabs”, many still wonder about the democracy of this process where the stalwarts far outnumber the delegates.

END

 

“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