“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

 

“Deputy GG slams heroes selection – Smith says it is a ‘narrow view’ to forget country’s racist past” – The Nassau Guardian 4^th July 2018

Excerpt from this article; “Deputy to the Governor General C. A. Smith yesterday criticized the selection process of the four named national heroes and said based on his criteria of the honor, only former Prime Minister the late Sir Lynden Pindling and former Governor General the late Sir Milo Butler met the standard.

Along with Sir Lynden and Sir Milo Butler, former leader of the United Bahamian Party and Premier of The Bahamas the late Sir Roland Symonette, and former Free National Movement Leader, the late Sir Cecil Wallace Whitfield were awarded the honor of national hero.

Yesterday, referring to Sir Roland, Smith explained that it is difficult for a majority black country to accept the head of a ‘racist; repressive, government’ being named a national hero.  He recalled the times of segregation and prejudicial treatment where black people could not work in banks or attend the theater on bay Street.

‘Of the four who were named as national heroes, I think two meet the standard, that’s Sir Lynden and Sir Milo Butler.  The other two, I think, do not meet the standard that I believe national heroes ought to be.

‘It does not negate the fact the other two did some good things.’

‘The slave master sometimes treated the slave well, but he was still a slave.”

Anyone who knows C. A Smith and had followed him during the last election cycle world have been totally baffled by these comments attributed to him, some of us just waited for the next shoe to fall and this came in the order of a retraction and apology by The Guardian’s Managing Editor Candia Dames, wherein she stated that the comments being attributed to C. A Smith were actually made by George Smith, former Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) member of parliament but how could such an egregious error be made by such a ‘seasoned ‘professional’?

The article is written by Royston Jones Jr, but each article before they go to press should approved by the editor especially front page stores of this magnitude; so what went wrong?  There is a saying, “Before you embark on a jouney of revenge, first dig two graves” claimed to have been said by Confucious, but literay scholars cannot seem to agree on this.

It would seems that in Ms. Dames’ fight to reveal the truth she has at times over stepped her bounds especially as it pertains to this prime minister and this administration; could she have been so blinded by ‘rage’ to have missed such a glearing ‘error’ or did she actually approve it in an attempt to create news.  Mind you there was no need to rush to print on this story because there was nothing to be ‘scooped’, as all the salacious details had already been released on social media over the naming of Sir. Roland Symonette as a national hero, there was time to correct the story so why did she decide to press on?

Some now question, was it really an ‘error’?

 We will see if she will attempt to push the blame off to the writer of the article because at the end of the day we all know that the responsibility lies with her and if she is seems to have allowed emotion to control the way she conducts herself as a journalist, then maybe it is time that she either resigns or is fire.

END

This past week has seen the Progressive Liberal Party’s (PLP) propaganda ‘machine’ go from the absolutely obscure, illogical and desperate to the outright cruel and morbid.
This all began with; Cabinet reshuffled – Minnis moves for ministers “– The Nassau Guardian, July 3rd 2018
Excerpt from this article; “Four Cabinet ministers of the Minnis administration will have their portfolios reassigned this week in a Cabinet reshuffle just a year after the Free National Movement was returned to power.
The Cabinet Office confirmed in a statement yesterday that, ‘The prime minister advised Her Excellency, the Governor General, to reallocate the portfolios of ministers Renward Ricardo Wells, Frankie Alfred Campbell, Michael Clifton Pintard and Lanisha Tamar Rolle.” This would have been and should have a simple exercise, one which has been seen before but what made it amusing was the instant response to it by the Leader of the Opposition; Philip ‘Brave’ Davis and others within this party; responses that amounted to nothing more than speculation and supposition; “In response to the Cabinet changes, Mr. Davis said: ‘The changes in portfolio allocations announced by the prime minster amount to nothing more than political musical chairs. It accomplishes nothing of substance and is merely shuffling the deck of bad cards.
‘One year into the government, the prime minister’s move condemns his own government for incompetence and ineffectiveness…. The PLP is not impressed by any of it.”

There are several reasons, in my opinion, as to why a prime minister may shuffle his cabinet; to give ministers a better overview of government, to move more effective Cabinet ministers or just to keep Cabinet ministers “on their toes”; whatever the reason it was in this case I will say that if the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) had done it once or twice during their last administration then maybe they would have been a more effective government and not been perceived of as being the epitome of corruption entering the 2017 general elections and is Mr. Davis suggesting that Perry Christie never shuffled his Cabinet due to their competence? Such a suggestion within itself it laughable but also gives one leave for serious concern.
In this statement, the Leader of the Opposition seems to have taken leave of all common sense and rationality by suggesting that the governing Free National Movement (FNM) is actually attempting to impress him and the few that actually believe that he [the Hon. Philip ‘Brave’ Davis] can actually lead that party to an election victory.
Then we enter in the realms of the morbid, cruel and usual, wherein it was suggested in a rumor that Phenton Neymour, former Free National Movement Member of Parliament for South Beach, had died. This rumor was nothing more than a shameless and cowardly attach by ‘certain persons’ which should be condemned to the fullest; as to even begin such a rumor indicates that one has no moral compass and has borderline sociopathic propensities.
Now we end the week with the announcement by ‘sources’ that the Junkanoo groups have been given a choice of whether to have a Boxing Day Parade and a News Day Parade because, according to ‘sources’ the government has informed the Junkanoo groups that the government does not have money for both. I feel while this lie has been thrown out in an attempt to not only discredit the Minnis administration but in a shameless attack on a particular minster; again a shameless and cowardly attack, unknown sources and without the requisite evidence to support it but then speculation and supposition does not require proof, right?
So, there we have it, the PLP’s propaganda machine in all of it glory and hard at work spewing out the ‘necessary; lies no matter the consequence, and as they sit back and watch their handy work I wonder if they realize that “NO LIE LASTS FOREVER”.
END

“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” – Sir Winston Churchill
“Mitchell: VAT Increase Unconscionable” – The Bahama Journal
Excerpt from this article; “According to Senator Fred Mitchell, fifty percent of the people who make under $30,000 a year in The Bahamas cannot makes ends meet at the end of the month.
The Leader of the Opposition in the Senate made it clear that he supports the government’s spending, but part ways on its push to impose a 12 per cent Value Added Tax.
‘It just seems counter-intuitive and unconscionable’, he said.”

Since it has been announced that the rate of value-added tax (VAT) would be increased by 4.5 percent, to 12%, many persons have taken the current administration to task on imposing such a burden in the backs of the ‘poor man’ but very little have questioned as to how we got to this point and to forget our past history and not learn from it is one of the most serious mistake that we can make as a nation.
Senator Mitchell says supports the government’s spending but ‘part ways’ on its push to impose a 4.5 percent increase to the rate of VAT, so basically the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Senator and Chairman is saying that he and his party consents to continued borrowing; increased national debt and increased deficit without a plan to actually reduce them – indeed the man is ‘mad’ and anyone else that supports his position, as he wants to make an omelet without breaking a few eggs; pure insanity and how we got to this point in the first place.
Simply put, you CANNOT continue to borrow without a way/plan of actually paying it back.
In November of 2016 it was reported that the government had collected almost a billion dollars from value-added tax (VAT); if this was the case and the money was actually out into the consolidated fund, as the story goes, what happened? What eventually happened to it because during this time the country’s economy had been downgraded at least once maybe even twice?
We all know that they say that hind sight is 20/20, and looking back now Senator Mitchell sight will be 20/20 , because while we will all agree that the country was in dire need of another source of revenue to offset the country’s borrowing and to pay its bill some could make the argument that it was “unconscionable” to introduce in the first place, if you were to apply the senator’s standards at to what is “unconscionable” but the simple fact that the funds collected not seemingly to have been used for the purposes that they were collected is what is really “unconscionable”, in my opinion but will Senator Mitchell admit to this, in hindsight?
In the fiscal year 2016/2017 when the government was set to borrow just under $100 million to cover the projected budget deficit; $30 million more than the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration had actually projected at the beginning of the 2016/2016 fiscal year; didn’t bells go off that maybe, just maybe ‘something’ was wrong? And I ask the PLP administration at the time to not blame Hurricane for this “miscalculation”, because an additional $150 million was subsequently borrowed after this storm and by the way, wasn’t VAT supposed to have been waived in the event of a natural disaster?
The truth of the matter is that the former administration never actually met any of its financial targets but now seeks to label the present measures as “unconscionable”; what is actually “unconscionable” is anyone in the former Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration criticizing anything to do with the present budget.
END

“Mitchell applauds FNM VAT rebels” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article; “Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Chairman Fred Mitchell yesterday applauded the four government MP’s who voted against the value-added tax (VAT) increase in parliament early Tuesday morning.

Bain and Grants Town MP Travis Robinson, Golden Isle MP Vaughn Miller, Pineridge MP Fredrick McAlpine and Centerville MP Reece Chipman all voted against the bill to increase Vat from 7.5 percent to 12 percent.

First of all is a vote that should have been condemned because what happened was against the advice of the views of the business community and against the views of the people at large,’ Mitchell said in an interview with the Nassau Guardian.”

It is indeed interesting that now the chairman of seems to want to cash in on this current situation given his past when he and his very own parliamentary colleagues seemed unable to show any form of moral conviction or courage when they served the people of The Bahamas as the government; the debacle of the Gaming referendum is prime example of this because while the people said NO, the government of the time, of which Senator/Chairman Mitchell was a member of parliament and Cabinet Member who sat silently as the Progressive Liberal Party went against the voice of the people but to be fair Mr. Mitchell he may not have even been in the country at the time.

My point: Senator/Chairman Mitchell’s opinion of this matter and the persons involved carries as much weight as a sieve carries water and represents an opinion best kept to himself, as he goes on to show his duplicitous hypocrisy in this matter; “And not just to vote with the PLP but vote no the principle that the tax is wrong, and I think that they ought to be applauded for having stood up for that.” But where was Senator Mitchell when the people said that the original implementation of values-added tax (VAT) was wrong?

Did it just become wrong?

Why should his opinion matter at all?

Personally, while I understand the position on which these four members of parliament claim to have stood, they should also realize that because of our system of governance there would be consequences.  I bear no ill will or have any bad words for these men; they voted their conscience and/or represented the voices of their constituents.

END

 

“PLP: Where are the VAT increase studies” – The Nassau Guardian
Excerpt from this article; “The opposition Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) yesterday called on the Minnis administration to provide the empirical data the government used to come to the conclusion that increasing value-added tax (VAT) from 7.5 percent to 12 percent was necessary.
During his contribution to the 2018/2019 budget debate in the Houser of Assembly yesterday, Prime Minister Dr. Hubert Minnis noted that the government explored different models of VAT, but the 12 percent proved to be the most feasible.
He did not provide any evidence of his analysis.
Shadow Minister of Finance and PLP Deputy Leader Chester Cooper said this consideration failed to show where any empirical analysis and studies that’s normally required of a Ministry of Finance,’ Cooper said during a press conference in the Minority Room after the prime minister wrapped up debate.”

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) must be mindful of the fact that they set a certain criteria under which the rate on value-added tax would automatically increase by law and I will continue to remind them of it; “The Compass Lexecon study also suggested the introduction of a new, permanent so-called fiscal rule to enhance the sustainability of our fiscal plan and to strengthen the Government’s credibility. Under such a fiscal rule, we would set two targets: one , a maximum target for the debt –to-GDP ratio and two, a target for the minimum annual reduction in that ratio, which would be waivable under emergency circumstances such as economic downturns and natural disasters.
The key point in this recommendation is that, should we fail to meet our fiscal debt target, the VAT rate would automatically be increased by law.”
So a few questions:
1. What were they referring to when they said “to strengthen the Government’s credibility” and was this ever achieved?
2. Did the past administration ever meet their targets of maximum target for the debt-to-GDP ratio ration and their target to the minimum annual reduction in that ration
3. Did the past administrating succeed in meeting its fiscal debt target? And
4. Due to the fact that they had never met these targets, are they saying suggesting that they would not have increased the rate on VAT if they had won the last election?
For them to now say that they need imperial evidence as to why the increase in value-added tax (VAT) came about would be for them to suggest that they were actually meeting their economic/fiscal targets for the country after the implementation of VAT and the economy was actually improving; we all know this is not true.
Exactly how many times was the country’s economy downgraded after the introduction of VAT?
The following except is after the fourth time that the economy was downgraded, as reported in The Tribune on the 21st of December of 2016 under the headline, “Standard and Poor’s Downgrade Bahamas to ‘Junk’ Status”
Excerpt from this article; “LEADING global credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s (S&P) yesterday handed the Bahamas an unwanted Christmas present – a downgrade to ‘junk’ status, reflecting the country’s worsening economic and fiscal position.
S&P’s action, based on the Bahamas’ weaker economic growth and slower fiscal consolidation pace, means the country has lost its all-important ‘investment grade’ status, which is potentially highly damaging for the nation and its economy as it signals to the international capital market that its creditworthiness is slipping into dangerous territory.”; this is two years after the implementation of VAT.
So; we had four economic downgrades, a warning that the country was still heading in the wrong direction, even after the implementation of value-added tax, which the government at the time claimed was performing above expectations; then there seemed to be a steady rate of borrowing instead of a downtick in borrowing and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) now asks for imperial data as to the reason to why there was an increase in VAT; how about they, as a collective, explain to the public first why we stood on the verge of being down-graded below ‘junk-status’, I man can you go any lower and what was their economic plan to avoid this from becoming a reality; was it more borrowing at high rates without a feasible plan on how to pay it back?
END

“Christie: PLP would not have raised VAT to 12%” – The Nassau Guardian
Excerpt from this article; “Former Prime Minister Perry Christie was oversaw the implementation of value-added tax (VAT) and the regularization and taxation of gaming houses in The Bahamas, said his administration had no plan to increase VAT to 12 percent, nor would it have increased taxes on gaming operators.
Christie said he would have thought the government would have engaged in a more consultative process before moving ahead with increasing VAT or gaming taxes.”
While I am at a total lost as to how and why the increased taxation of the gaming industry has gotten so contentious, so quickly; I would like to say that the only thing that I agree with the former prime minister on is that the government “should have engaged in a more consultative process”, but for him to now be saying that the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) would not have raised VAT to 12% is merely his way of saying that there was a plan to increase the rate but by how much had not been decided yet.

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) always seems to find a way to talk themselves into a situation from which they cannot give logical explanations; “The Compass Lexecon study suggested the introduction of a new, permanent so-called fiscal rule to enhance the sustainability of our fiscal plan and to strengthen the Government’s credibility. Under such a fiscal rule, we would set two targets: one, a maximum target for the debt-to-ratio-GDP ratio and two, a target for the minimum annual reduction in that ratio, which would be waivable under emergency circumstances such as economic downturns and natural disasters.
The key point in this recommendation is that, should we fail to meet our fiscal debt target, the VAT rate would automatically be increased by law”
Excerpt from the 2014/2015 Budget Communication, delivered by the Ho. Perry G. Christie.
So while the former prime minister is seeming to suggest that he would not have raised the rate on VAT to 12 percent if his party had won the 2017 general elections, the record clearly reflects that the rate of VAT would have automatically increased by law because he would have very hard pressed to attempt to sell the notion that his administration actually met their fiscal target; bearing in mind the four economic downgrades during his administration; so the question that comes back is what did his government actually do with the extra income generated by VAT?
If it were used to run the country i.e. pay salaries and other bills; then why were so many bills left outstanding and so many Bahamian citizens left unpaid? Was the country’s payroll really that large and if it were applied to the country’s debt then why was it [the national debt] steadily increasing?
The former prime minister and his minister of state for finance seem to now be on a mission to either clear their names or ride the present wave of discontent currently against the present administration to garner support for themselves or for the ill-fated PLP party.
I say if the people allow this then may God be with them as they allow this nonsense to unfold right before your eyes.
END

 

“Lloyd: I would rather lose election than lose my country” – The Nassau Guardian
Excerpt from this article; “Defending the government’s 2018/2019 budget yesterday, Minister of Education Jeffery Lloyd said he would be satisfied losing the next election if it means ‘rescuing’ The Bahamas from economic disaster.
Lloyd said he supports the budget even though it is ‘uncomfortable in some of its terms’.
‘The unpalatable, unpardonable, unvarnished truth is simply this, we have maxxed out our credit card’, Lloyd said during the budget debate.
‘We have not a single cent to spare.’
‘The country is sitting at a precarious state of disaster … [and] we are over that precipice from which there is no return. As the DPM said yesterday, we are one disaster away from disaster.”
“I would rather loser the next election, if it means ‘rescuing’ The Bahamas from economic disaster” a powerful statement and isn’t that what this budget and 4.5 point increase in Value-added Tax (VAT) is really about?

No one said that the road to correct the wrongs which we have been ignoring for far too long was going to be easy but we all sat back and asked for ‘someone’ to do ‘something’ and when someone listened and is courageous enough to do something, we then complain about what is being proposed – WHY?!
Because it is not the ‘’something’ that we had in mind?
Actually what did we have in mind?
The Truth of the budget is while the rate on Vat has increased, in the long term [this is long term planning] there will be a reduction in custom duties and excise taxes; so there is a plan to attempt to strike a balance in this budget, bring government spending and borrowing under control, putting the country’s finances in a much better position than they are today and how they were met a year ago, while at the same time attempting to strike a balance – this cannot be disputed – only by those that have no idea of what has/is being proposed and/or by those wishing to gain political mileage going into the next general election, let me address that.
“You can’t threaten me”
The opposition has shown great support for the people at his time but showed very little support when they implemented VAT. They now say, that it [VAT] was already on the books when they took office 2012 and I ask if they saw it has being something that would hurt rather than help, then why implement it? Then there was the issue/question of the money collected from this tax and where it was going; while it may have been going into the consolidated fund, as per the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), how much was actually going to pay the country’s bills, as we have such a massive amount of unpaided and past due bills?
Let me be clear, this situation did not begin with the former Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) administration but it was that administrating that first promised, as it implemented VAT to take care of the country’s financial affairs but only failed the people by actually producing four economic downgrades and had the country a heartbeat away from junk status or did we actually achieve this accomplishment under their watch?
So, if any of them claim to NOW have the answers, they should be turned away like the deceitful, hypocrites that they have proven themselves to be.
I will end this with the words of Mark Humes, Free National Movement (FNM) Member of Parliament for Fort Charlotte; “I don’t take any pleasure in supporting this budget but it is a necessary action for our past actions.
Indeed, this not a time of delight for any of us but some of us do see the bigger picture and long term goals; which are necessary and which must be taken.
Some may ask why now and I ask why if not now then when?
END