Tag: education

My Morning Paper – December 06, 2024 – Bullying by the PLP’s Playbook

As one listens to the voice note by Fred Mitchell, Chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Minister of Foreign Affairs, it is unmistakable that the PLP has dusted off its toxic playbook of bullying—a desperate attempt to silence dissent, control its base, and intimidate opponents into a submission of silence The characteristics of bullying—threats, insults, and exclusion—are all on full displayed here, stopping just short of outright threats.

Mitchell’s remarks are riddled with inflammatory language aimed at disparaging those who dare to challenge the PLP. Referring to individuals as “Uncle Toms” is not merely name-calling; it’s an insidious tactic designed to demean, isolate, and publicly shame. By weaponizing this historically loaded term, Mitchell not only insults individuals but also seeks to undermine their credibility and worth.

Then there’s his use of exclusionary language: “All PLPs and people of goodwill.” This phrasing creates a clear divide—you’re either aligned with the PLP, or you’re cast out as lacking “goodwill.” It’s the oldest trick in the bully’s handbook: force conformity by ostracizing those who don’t fall in line. This type of rhetoric stifles open dialogue and reinforces a culture of fear and submission.

A closer look at Mitchell’s tone reveals an unmistakable sense of insecurity. Like most bullies, his bravado masks a deep fear of losing power. By accusing opponents of being “violent, criminal, and unpatriotic,” Mitchell is engaging in classic projection—attributing his party’s divisive tactics to others. His claims that the opposition’s actions undermine the “rule of law” are ironic, given the PLP’s own history of suppressing dissent and fostering discord.

Mitchell’s voice note also attempts to co-opt the narrative of Bahamian history for political gain. He chastises the Free National Movement (FNM) for allegedly mocking a significant moment in the nation’s fight for freedom, yet fails to acknowledge the broader context: the PLP’s refusal to engage in democratic debate is what escalated tensions in the first place. To suggest that dissenting voices are “burning the house down” for power is disingenuous, especially when the PLP’s own actions—such as silencing the opposition—have contributed to this political discord.

Mitchell’s remarks are a textbook example of bullying behavior:

While he stops short of direct threats, his rhetoric is rife with implications that dissenters will face social and political ostracism; Threats and Intimidation.

The use of “Uncle Toms” is a deliberate attempt to insult and demean; Name-Calling.

By framing loyalty to the PLP as synonymous with “goodwill,” Mitchell excludes and isolates those who hold opposing views; The Threat of Exclusion.

Overall, the real tragedy here is the chilling effect such rhetoric has on democratic discourse. Instead of fostering an environment where ideas can be debated and challenged, the PLP’s leadership has chosen to weaponize language to silence critics. This is not the behavior of a party confident in its vision for the Bahamas; it is the behavior of a party desperate to cling to power at any cost.

Perhaps the most glaring irony is Mitchell’s call for “PLPs and people of goodwill” to reject the “violence” and “psychological warfare” of the opposition. This statement is rich coming from someone whose own rhetoric is steeped in psychological manipulation and divisive tactics. If the PLP truly wishes to uphold the values of unity and goodwill, it might start by reevaluating its own approach to political discourse.

The truth of the matter is this; if Mitchell’s voice note attempts to frame the FNM as the instigators of “violence, patriotism, criminality, and discord,” one cannot ignore the underlying truth: had the PLP allowed the opposition the chance to speak and address the matter at hand, this entire debacle could have been avoided. Instead, the PLP’s refusal to engage has only fueled the very discord it decries.

So that lead to me this conclusion; Fred Mitchell’s voice note is more than a partisan rant; it’s a reflection of a broader issue within the PLP’s leadership. Bullying tactics, whether through language or actions, have no place in a democratic society. It’s time for the PLP to step back, reflect, and prioritize dialogue over domination. Only then can they truly claim to act in the “goodwill” of the Bahamian people.

END

 My Morning Paper – December 4, 2024 – The Fine Art of Playing Victim and Personal Responsibility

“Mitchell decries ‘false narrative’ on indictment” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt from this article;

“Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Chairman Fred Mitchell yesterday accused several former Cabinet ministers of creating a “false narrative” around the recent indictment in the United States of three Bahamian law enforcement officers and eight other Bahamians on drug trafficking and firearms related charges.

“Where the hell have Marvin Dames, Brent Symonette, Dionisio D’Aguilar come from?” Mitchell asked in a statement.

“They are joining the actors in the FNM drama written by [FNM Leader] Michael Pintard called the ‘Sky is Falling – Doom and Gloom’, also starring [former Democratic National Alliance Leader] Branville McCartney in a cameo role.

“If this weren’t so serious, you would have to laugh at these collective political clowns. They don’t want to do the work to convince the Bahamian people that they are the better alternative. They want to create a false narrative out of this indictment in the US to ride to victory.”

Mitchell insisted, “The Bahamian people are smarter than that.”

My first question is; what is the “false narrative” that Fred Mitchell is referring to? 

It is easy to slip into a mindset of being a victim, especially when life throws you curve balls or situations that are not planned for.

Let’s take a journey into this swirling vortex of political posturing, personal responsibility, and the ever-enticing allure of the victim narrative. Today, we tackle a question as relevant as it is vexing: Is the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government, led by Fred Mitchell, setting up a narrative of victimhood to deflect from its own shortcomings?

And more importantly—what does this mean for governance in The Bahamas?

At this point in time it would appear that the Chairman of the New Day Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Fred Mitchell is setting up a narrative wherein the New Day Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government is being victimized by The United States and by its very own citizens but there is a problem with constantly setting yourself as victim.

There seems to be a propensity for the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), when facing hardship to give into the temptation.  There is a temptation to shift blame onto external circumstances or other people; it just seems overwhelming for them. This overwhelming temptation then forces them to avoid personal responsibility in confronting their role in whatever adverse situation that they may find themselves in, usually of their own making.

But here is the thing; constantly portraying yourself as the victim only makes people lose respect for you; the reason being that because when you adopt this mandate/mindset, you are telling the country and the world that you have no control over your responsibilities and if you do not believe that you have control then why should others believe in you?

Playing the victim usually begins small because it is easy to off load your personal responsibility onto someone else but over time this mentality becomes as a “trap” and the more you use it the more powerless you appear.  As you appear more powerless then others believe that you are at the mercy of external forces, so they lose faith in you and walk away from you and your leadership; because your ability to run the country, as you have been elected to do, is then called into question.

People respect those that take responsibility for their acts and that can rise above the challenges and not be consumed by them. But by constantly blaming others for your misfortunes, simply says that you lack courage to face your challenges face on – which makes it difficult for persons to trust you.

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

END

My Morning Paper – November 14 2024 – The Issue of Transparency At Home

The Chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) once said; “We oppose this Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  The FNM has this view; they’ve passed something called the Fiscal Responsibly Act, The Procurement Act, The Freedom of Information Act.  All of these things have nothing to do with people’s ordinary lives. 

Freedom of Information, I don’t think so.

It’s bureaucratic, expensive to execute.

We are talking about a philosophical difference between us and them.”

Now Prime Minister; the Hon. Philip E. Davis K.C. takes the world stage and demands accountability and transparency form the world as it related to Climate Change.

“PM calls for $1trn fund to fight climate change” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “THE Prime Minister yesterday called for greater global transparency as he added his voice to calls for the creation of a $1trn fund to combat climate change.

Philip Davis KC, speaking at COP 29 conference, said The Bahamas is ‘advancing’ it’s first Biennial Transparency Report on progress towards meeting its climate change goals with funding from the Capacity-Building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT).

The Enhanced Transparency Framework (ETF) framework allows countries to track and report on national climate change mitigation policies and adaptation actions, and gain support towards achieving the global temperature and adaptation goals, including their progress on achieving individual national; determined contributions (NDCs).

‘Transparency is not merely a reporting requirement. It’s the backbone of real, lasting climate action.  For countries, transparency means acknowledging where we stand and what we need,’ said Mr. Davis.”

 I wonder if I were to rewrite that last line if all would be well with in our country; “‘Transparency is not merely a reporting requirement. It’s the backbone of real, lasting democracy”.

The New Day Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) government is at odds with “democracy.”  They are willing to go on the world stage and expect and demand transparency, accountability and democracy but apply it at their convenience at home; but real life does not work that way.

Does Prime Minister Davis not realize how contradictory this statement really is; does he even care?

Let us take a look at what he is really saying and how he is contradicting himself and his government.

Contradictions in Transparency: A Closer Look at the Davis-led PLP Government

In the same breath that Prime Minister Davis is calling for global transparency, his administration faces serious transparency issues at home. A few notable examples highlight this ongoing struggle:

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Delays

Despite FOIA being passed by the previous administration, the current PLP government under Prime Minister Davis has been slow to implement it fully. The delay in rolling out FOIA keeps critical information inaccessible, making it harder for Bahamian citizens to hold their government accountable.

Electricity Rate Increase

The public faced an increase in electricity rates with little explanation, drawing frustration and distrust. Many citizens questioned the financial management practices of Bahamas Power and Light (BPL), yet clear, detailed information on how rates were determined or the factors driving these costs were not provided. For a government that calls for international transparency, this lack of openness at home on issues affecting daily life reveals a troubling contradiction.

Lack of Transparency on Government Contracts

Under the current administration, there have been limited disclosures on government contracts, despite the Procurement Act being in place. While the government has a system for public procurement, the lack of timely updates and detailed contract information has raised questions. For instance, significant contracts awarded without competitive bidding remain undisclosed to the public, leaving citizens in the dark about how and where their tax dollars are being spent.

Handling of National Debt and Public FinancesThe PLP government has also been hesitant to embrace the Fiscal Responsibility Act’s mandates, which aim to increase fiscal transparency. For example, while they release budget information, certain critical reports on the country’s debt levels, particularly regarding the terms of recent borrowing, have lacked detail. This makes it challenging for citizens to understand the true state of the national debt and the strategies employed to manage it.

Conclusion

In my opinion, it’s almost surreal to see Prime Minister Davis step onto the world stage, all fired up, calling for transparency, accountability, and democracy—as if he’s auditioning for the role of “Champion of Openness” at the Global Oscars. And yet, back home, where he actually has the power to practice what he preaches, it’s like he’s developed a sudden case of selective amnesia.

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

END
    

My Morning Paper – November 9, 2024 – Ignorance in Action: The Cost of Political Games in The Bahamas

“Nothing is more terrible than to see ignorance in action.” – Goethe

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), under the guise of “good governance,” seems to have embraced what could only be described as “silly season” – a term frequently used by PLP Chairman Fred Mitchell to dismiss criticisms from the opposition Free National Movement (FNM). Ironically, Mitchell’s attempt to call out the opposition on various issues ignores the glaring contradictions in his own party’s approach to governance.

Prime Minister Philip Davis, in an attempt to address rising public frustration, recently noted that individuals’ choices impact their cost of living. While there’s some truth to the notion that personal spending habits play a role, the statement came across as dismissive, particularly since it was paired with his admission that the cost of living in The Bahamas is indeed excessively high. The average Bahamian faces soaring prices on everything from basic necessities to utilities, and attributing this solely to personal choices appears somewhat out of touch with the economic realities. Many believe that the government’s decisions have done little to ease these burdens, and instead, this approach feels more like an effort to deflect responsibility.

The government’s minimal interventions and inadequate strategies to address inflation have left citizens struggling with high prices. By pointing fingers back at citizens, Davis’s statement comes off as an exercise in deflection rather than genuine problem-solving. For many Bahamians, this statement symbolized yet another instance of the PLP avoiding accountability for failing to alleviate the pressing financial struggles facing their people.

Deputy Prime Minister Chester Cooper recently chastised individuals for circulating a video that, according to him, “could hurt the image of The Bahamas.” While it’s understandable for a government official to be concerned about the nation’s global reputation, this stance would feel a lot more genuine if the PLP’s own history didn’t reveal a similar approach. In fact, when the PLP was in opposition, they famously placed billboards across Nassau that highlighted The Bahamas’ murder count, all in an effort to paint the FNM government as inept in handling crime. This move undoubtedly impacted the country’s image, yet the PLP seemed comfortable with these tactics when it benefited their political agenda.

It’s difficult for many Bahamians to reconcile Cooper’s criticism with the PLP’s past actions. It raises the question: does the PLP’s concern for the nation’s image only extend as far as its political expediency? This double standard demonstrates an unwillingness to own up to their own actions, especially when those very actions mirror the same behaviour’s they criticize.

The “silly season” label has become the PLP’s go-to defence whenever faced with valid criticism, conveniently ignoring the fact that their approach to governance has often been marked by a lack of introspection and accountability. Since May 2007, the PLP has seemingly been in a perpetual “silly season,” displaying a pattern of pointing fingers outward while avoiding difficult self-reflection.

The Bahamian people deserve a government that doesn’t just speak about “good governance” but embodies it through consistent actions, even when those actions require acknowledging past missteps.

The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) fails for one reason; it is their nature.”

END

My Morning Paper – November 06, 2024 – The Hypocrisy of the Progressive Liberal Party’s Stance on the Baha Mar Scandal – Collusion or Coincidence?

In recent weeks, Fred Mitchell, Chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), has been vocal in his criticism of Sarkis Izmirlian, the developer behind the troubled Baha Mar project. By branding Izmirlian a “failed developer,” Mitchell and the PLP appear to be sidestepping a recent judgment against China Construction America (CCA), which implicates officials within the “New Day” government in alleged collusion. This attempt to deflect raises pressing questions about the PLP’s accountability, transparency, and the potential hypocrisy of their current stance.

The Attempt to Paint Izmirlian as Solely Responsible

In the narrative promoted by Mitchell and the PLP, the failure of Baha Mar is pinned solely on Sarkis Izmirlian, while the role of CCA, the project’s lead construction company, and potential issues of sabotage remain unmentioned. Mitchell’s argument suggests that the collapse of Baha Mar was due to Izmirlian’s negligence or incompetence, rather than any outside interference. However, this interpretation ignores a key aspect of the situation: the $1.6 billion judgment awarded to Izmirlian in damages, which implies something far more complex than simple developer failure.

The judgment against CCA indicates that Baha Mar’s struggles were not due to a “failed” developer alone but rather due to interference, delays, and possible collusion involving Chinese interests and Bahamian officials. The omission of these facts in Mitchell’s statements risks misleading the Bahamian public about the true circumstances surrounding Baha Mar’s failure.

The PLP’s Questionable Role in a “Private Matter”

Mitchell’s recent remarks instruct Bahamians to “sit down, be quiet, and stay out of this private dispute.” Ironically, it was the PLP, during the Christie administration—where Mitchell and current Prime Minister Philip Davis both served as cabinet ministers—that injected itself into what was initially a private matter. The administration justified its intervention as a measure to protect Bahamian subcontractors’ interests. Yet, it is now clear that the intervention may have been far from neutral, and it may even have contributed to the challenges faced by the developer.

Despite funds being provided by Izmirlian’s team to pay subcontractors, the contractor, CCA, used this payment to purchase and develop another Bahamian property. For this to happen, permits and approvals would likely have been required, suggesting that Bahamian officials had to be aware of and possibly even sanctioned these actions. This scenario is eerily reminiscent of other instances of poor communication and accountability, such as the controversial entry of Carnival into the country early in the PLP’s administration, where no official took responsibility for the permits issued.

Collusion or Coincidence?

The forensic reports due later this month are likely to shed more light on the potential collusion between Bahamian officials and CCA. Nonetheless, the timing and circumstances surrounding the PLP’s involvement in the project have raised serious concerns. The assertion that the government’s intervention was motivated purely by concern for Bahamian subcontractors is at odds with the details emerging from the investigation, which suggests that key decisions may have been influenced by interests beyond national pride or protectionism.

Mitchell’s current rhetoric ignores the complexity of these issues, preferring to keep public attention on Izmirlian as the “failed developer” rather than acknowledging the PLP’s role in the ongoing scandal. The Bahamian people deserve an honest answer: if the PLP’s only aim was to help subcontractors, how did a significant amount of the project’s funds end up being used by CCA for separate ventures? Why was no oversight applied to ensure that funds were used appropriately?

Deflection Tactics and the FNM Blame Game

Another deflection tactic used by the PLP is the suggestion that the Free National Movement (FNM) is spreading rumors about potential job losses due to the judgment against CCA. This narrative seems to serve as a smokescreen to distract from the PLP’s alleged role in the scandal. There is little concrete evidence that the FNM has launched such a campaign, and it’s worth asking why Mitchell would choose this moment to bring up such a claim.

If the PLP’s involvement was as innocent as they claim, why not fully cooperate with the investigation and present the forensic evidence to the public? The refusal to engage with the findings of the judgment—while deflecting blame onto a developer and political opposition—paints a picture of a government unwilling to be accountable for its past actions.

Accountability Is Key

For a government that prides itself on being a “New Day” administration, the PLP’s handling of the Baha Mar scandal demonstrates a continuation of old ways. Bahamians deserve answers, transparency, and an end to the rhetoric that paints one party as the scapegoat while officials avoid accountability for their own potential missteps.

In light of the judgment, it’s time for Mitchell and the PLP to follow their own advice and exercise caution in their statements. As more information emerges, it’s essential that the PLP is held accountable for its role in the Baha Mar fiasco and that the Bahamian people receive clear and transparent answers about how and why government officials were involved.

END

My Morning Paper – October 23, 2024 – Just the Facts Please…..

I have always said in The Bahamas that when it comes to politics, there are two sets of “facts”; the actual facts and there are Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) facts and what I have come to find out is that these two sets of facts do not assimilate.

In a statement in the Nassau Guardian this morning , in reference to the recent Baha Mar ruling, the PLP Chairman is quoted as saying;” Baha Mar developer Sarkis Izmirlian of “seeking to tell a narrative which does not line up with the facts”.

When the chairman talks about the facts not lining up, exactly whose facts is he referring to?

It would appear that they lined up for Justice Andrew Borrok of the Supreme Court of the state of New York but that is beside the point I guess.

 “Mitchell slams Izmirlian, Pintard and Baha Mar ruling.” – The Nassau Guardian

Excerpt form this article; “Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Chairman and Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell yesterday accused former Baha Mar developer Sarkis Izmirlian of “seeking to tell a narrative which does not line up with the facts”.

Mitchell was responding to a significant New York court judgment finding that Izmirlian lost his Baha Mar project a decade ago as a result of fraud and breaches committed by China Construction America (CCA).

Mitchell’s claim was made notwithstanding the fact that Justice Andrew Borrok of the Supreme Court of the State of New York said in his ruling that credible evidence indicated that Izmirlian acted “honorably and commercially reasonably” in seeking to have the multi-billion-development completed.

The judge awarded Izmirlian’s BML Properties Limited $1.6 billion against China Construction America as a result of the fraud and breaches.

Mitchell also lashed out at Opposition Leader Michael Pintard who on Sunday called for an investigation into the inferences in the ruling that Bahamian government officials had colluded with CCA to push Izmirlian out.

“We’re concerned about the leader of the opposition, who jumps on a judgment, comments written by a judge in the United States,” said Mitchell in a video recording that was widely circulated yesterday.

“When is the leader of the opposition going to support Bahamians and support The Bahamas?”

“Support Bahamians and support The Bahamas” on what exactly, Mr. Mitchell?

Here, we have the chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party attempting to attack the Leader of the Opposition Free National Movement (FNM) with the old line of being “anti-Bahamian”.  He did this when the New Day, Old Way Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) went to “war” with the Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA), at that time every one that disagreed with the PLP government was seen as being “anti-Bahamian”.

Another instance occurred when Bahamians protested over issues like inadequate electricity and poor infrastructure in islands such as Andros and Eleuthera. The government’s response was to dismiss some of these criticisms as lacking in national loyalty, framing critics as opposing progress and nation-building efforts.

This has been a recurring theme in the PLP’s narrative whenever they face public discontent or organized opposition to their policies, so this has been established let us move on.

It is simply amazing that the chairman of the New Day, Old Way PLP government seeks to attack the leader of the opposition and the BML Properties Limited over the recent Baha Mar ruling when it was the findings of the Supreme Court of the State of New York  that stated; “In addition to the court ruling in favor of the Izmirlian family for the sum of $1.6 billion, the judgment referenced evidence of troubling allegations about the direct involvement and active support of officials in the then-PLP administration when Prime Minister [Philip] Davis served as deputy leader,” so herein is where the issue comes in.

It would appear that the court ruling condemns the PLP administration for what amounts to collusion; in acting in concert with the contractor CCA to gain ownership of Baha Mar but I am sure that the New Day, Old way government does not see it that way but interestingly enough again Prime Minister Davis and Chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) do not seem to be on the same page as it pertains to this issue.  We have the Prime Minister instructing the Attorney General to review the matter; while the Chairman Mitchell suggests that there really is nothing to review.

So what’s worse here? A government that can’t govern or one that hides its failures behind accusations of treason and lies? Calling criticism “unpatriotic” is the real betrayal. It’s the last refuge of a failed administration, desperate to distract from the truth that they’re not doing their jobs. And the truth is, Bahamians are suffering, the government is failing, and that is fact.

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

END