...will The Bahamas government allow Bahamas Petroleum Company (BPC) to drill for oil willy-nilly in Bahamian waters ...and risk the destruction of the Bahamian bread and butter industry - tourism?

Young Man's View: The Oil Industry

By ADRIAN GIBSON
ajbahama@hotmail.com
Nassau, The Bahamas


...

I continue to believe that Bahamas Petroleum Company is a bit player in the oil industry and, having been told of the overly emotional online attacks on me by so-called shareholders/investors after my first column, I am now even more interested in piercing the veil and looking into any and all drilling agreements that this company—and any other company— has with our government.

 

For some reason, every time I think about the giving away of our national patrimony, I hear Beavis and Butthead sarcastically snickering in the background. The licensing agreement between BPC and the government states that the oil royalties would be disbursed on a sliding scale, i.e. if 75,000 barrels of oil are produced daily, the royalty rate would be 12.5 per cent; if it’s in excess of 75,000 and up to 150,000, it would be 15 per cent; 150,000 to 200,000 daily barrels would yield a royalty rate of 17.5 per cent; 250,000 to 350,000 would result in a 20 per cent rate and any daily production in excess of 350,000 barrels would incur a royalty rate of 25 per cent.

 

The Bahamas has no Environmental Protection Act and the trite regulatory practices (Environmental Impact Assessment reports) overseen by groups like the BEST Commission—a toothless bulldog— is laughable at best.

 

I totally agree with a recent article written by attorney Fred Smith (Queen’s Counsel) when he said: “As the Bahamas broadens its industrial investment profile; encourages large scale urban development; promotes all inclusive anchor projects by Bahamians and foreigners and continues its growth and development, it becomes more and more urgent for an independent regulatory body with teeth, to protect our often pristine, and always fragile environment.”

 

He went on to say: “The Bahamas, as a Small Island Nation, must make protecting the environment a priority. It is also important that stakeholders and interested parties who may be affected by industrial and/or other urban developments have an opportunity to be properly consulted. This has been repeatedly affirmed by our Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and Privy Council in the Guana Cay and Abaco Wilson City Power Plant litigation. The BEST Commission has been established for years but it is not a statutory body and needs to be institutionally created by legislation to make it effective and relevant.”

 

Yes, our sluggish, relatively rebounding economy could do with an injection of oil money—but it must be on the best, most nationally-sound terms and not be a hurried, tactless and superficial attempt to redesign our economy overnight. The Nigerian experience should teach us, as a nation, the shortfalls of unregulated drilling, of allowing foreign companies to buy off prominent members of government and of an oil rich country having a poverty stricken population due to corruption, greed and overtly scandalous behaviour.

 

Now, while Bahamians are discussing oil from the perspective of a countrywide get-rich-quick-scheme, many of them haven’t considered the environmental ramifications, how BPC will likely go about getting it and/or a thorough examining of the peripheral issues related to oil drilling.

 

In a published Facebook post forwarded to me by economist and lawyer Dr Gilbert Morris, he said:

 

“Let’s forget about the risk premiums to protect our waters and let’s forget about the relative costs of both drilling and pumping. If there are 3 billion barrels undersea in the Bahamas, what would you think when you learn that the US consumes 19 million barrels per day? This means, if we have 3 billion barrels, our total store of oil is 150 days of US consumption.”

 

He went on: “So therefore, here is what is likely to happen: The lead firm will confirm its find and say to the government we will pay you a royalty. Let’s suppose the royalty is 90% of profits, just to be overly optimistic. The government would never see a dime. Why? Because the firm with the rights in the Bahamas, will sell the rights to the proven reserves to a larger company. That company will determine what it costs to pump the oil from the depths. The government will only gain income, even if its on the gross, from oil that passes the Relief Valve. But nothing will. Because when the large Company buys the rights, they will Cap the Wells immediately. That is because, oil prices would need to be over $200 per barrel to make its economically feasible to pump it. So Caping is like storage until the market price makes pumping feasible.”

 

“A final point: if the oil has a high sulfur content, (Sour), then that adds refining costs too. There are lots of oil finds all over the world. The question is, is it financially feasible to pump it. If the find in the Bahamas was a “monster find” (and it could become that), the question will be the cost of pumping – including environmental protection costs – relative to the profit yield based on the market price over time,” the economist concluded.

 

An October 2012 report in The Economist stated that oil is stolen in Nigeria at a record pace, with the government inflating output figures by using a discombobulating assortment of statistics. According to that report, Nigeria announced that its oil production had increased to 2.7 million barrels per day; however, due to a corrupt culture, that figure is nearly impossible to verify.

According to a former senior World Banker—Oby Ezekwesili (a Nigerian)—some $400 billion of that country’s oil revenue has been squandered or pilfered since 1960. Nigeria, home of the world’s ninth largest gas reserves, also has an unregulated petroleum industry where a Petroleum Industry Bill has been stalled for 15 years. The Bill was drafted with the intent to heighten transparency, proffer a regulatory regime and govern every aspect of the nation’s oil industry. However, glad-handing politicians have managed to bar the formulation of any effective regulatory regime as that would curb their corrupt practices and proscribe deterring—even penal—sanctions. Could there be similar reasons why no such Bill has been considered in the Bahamas—why even Environmental Protection legislation hasn’t been brought to the Parliament?

 

Indeed, a joint report by Transparency International and the Revenue Watch Institute revealed that Nigeria’s government-run National Petroleum Corporation is “accountable to no one” and is a “slush fund for the government,” which makes it the worst of 44 national and foreign companies included in their study. When one thinks of how locally government-run corporations have been mismanaged over the years—e.g. Bahamasair, the Bahamas Electricity Corporation and even the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (before the sale)—there’s much to desire and the thought of our governments running an oil slush fund is a no-no!

 

What’s more, Nigeria’s oil producing delta region has suffered environmental devastation that would eternally damage our pristine environment (beaches, mangroves, etc) and, as it relates to the environs and our tourism industry, set us back into the Ice Ages. Whilst the United Nations have chided the Nigerian government for their unchecked environmental degradation, there has been little to no attempt by that government to take legislative initiatives to curb indiscriminate drilling—just as there has been no attempt by the government of the Bahamas thus far! After a rig explosion (Chevron) in January, 2012, local Nigerian environmental groups have placed a $3 billion price tag on losses accrued over 46 days due to fires, a gas leak and environmental degradation. Even more, in December 2011, an oil spill at one of Royal Dutch Shell’s offshore oil operations was estimated to have cost a record $5 billion in damages. Apparently, the farmlands of Nigeria—particularly in the Niger delta—are progressively being destroyed. It remains to be seen what penalties or compensation will be rendered by both companies to the Nigerian people, considering the predilection of corrupt government officials and the likelihood that it would merely be swept under the rug. The Nigerian response, in these instances, could hardly be compared to the United States response to British Petroleum’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico!

 

According to a Green Peace International article titled ‘Shell Shocked’: “We witnessed the slow poisoning of the waters of this country and the destruction of vegetation and agricultural land by oil spills which occur during petroleum operations. But since the inception of the oil industry in Nigeria, more than twenty-five years ago, there has been no concerned and effective effort on the part of the government, let alone the oil operators, to control environmental problems associated with the industry.”

 

A 2010 Newsweek article entitled ‘Oil’s Shame in Africa’ further stated that: “Oil spills in Nigeria are a common occurrence; it has been estimated that between 9 million to 13 million barrels have been spilled since oil drilling started in 1958.”

 

Due to a lack of regulation and political patronage, more than 1000 people lose their lives to oil-related deaths in Nigeria every year, 70 per cent of that nation’s population live below the poverty line (less than $1 dollar per day), clean potable water is hardly accessible and—even whilst it is a major oil exporter having racked up more than $340 billion over the last few decades—Nigeria still imports most of its gasoline. Is it possible that we could be an oil producing nation that exports our crude but then—as is the case with salt—must buy back and import our own oil (in its now refined state)?

 

Considering the corruption, dodgy practices and dysfunction of some of our elected representatives and public officers, should we too be worried about gas price-fixing scams (which cost Nigeria $29 billion in the last 10 years), oil theft (which cost the Nigerian treasury $6 billion per year), fuel subsidy scams (which cost the Nigerians $6.8 billion) and an overall proclivity by some officials to “tief” and misuse public funds like it was going out of style (which has cost the Nigerian’s nearly $400 billion since their Independence in 1960)?

So, will the government allow BPC to drill willy-nilly and risk the destruction of our bread and butter industry (tourism)? Will they risk the contamination of our groundwater and our soil, of the destruction of our coastal environment, of our local fishing industry being ruined by oil spills and of oil sheen spreading to fishing habitats with the government still being handicapped in its capacity to even conduct clean-ups at Clifton Pier (from BEC’s spills)? And, what about gas flaring—which is the release of unusable or unwanted raw natural gas and associated gases—into the atmosphere? Look, if we’re going to drill, let’s do it the right way, let’s put any and all related legislation and regulations in place beforehand. The government must remember that we the people—and those who make up the government—all live in the Bahamas and, unlike some of the principals of BPC, have nowhere else to go and call “home” (in the truest sense of the word).

 

I urge the government to get on with the people’s business, to stop talking foolishness in our Parliament or resign and get the hell out!

 

...

 

May 06, 2013

 

Tribune 242

 

Bahamas Blog International

 

Kick CARICOM to the kerb

We, Jamaica and Jamaicans - need to give the six-month notice and leave CARICOM

I would support the repatriation of CARICOM nationals who work in Jamaica.  Parochial, yes.  More jobs for Jamaicans

By Ronald Mason, Jamaica Gleaner Contributor

There comes a time when the only thing to do is make clear, definitive, unambiguous statements about things of importance.  Here goes.  I am a Jamaican, I am NOT a Caribbean man.

I want no part of the totally useless creation we label CARICOM.  The peoples who populate those islands 1,000 miles away from my home are not brothers and sisters.  There has been some cross-breeding, but it's statistically insignificant to warrant the familial term 'brothers'.

I do not ascribe to the notion that because we are primarily and predominantly of the same racial composition, that makes us brothers.  The same could be said of the people of Papua New Guinea.  They were also former colonies of the same empire, but I do not hear this claim for integration with those good people.

I have visited countries in this Eastern Caribbean.  On arrival, one is not imbued, as a Jamaican, with the feeling of belonging.  One is met with the quizzical, "What do you want now?"

I have had a period of enforced residence with some of them at a particular North American university and here in Jamaica.  This has not created any pleasant memories, and I would have been better off not to have had those interpersonal experiences.

NOT THE SAME

We are different.  Mauby, blood pudding, bake, monkeys unfettered, major racial divide are all daily features of life in those islands.  The fact that the West Indies cricket team is offered up as a source of bonding strikes me as overreaching.  The team, when it was great, had individuals who proved to be extraordinary.  They were immensely, individually talented.

They had a singular purpose - to win.  They did win, but the team was created initially out of British colonies.  The development of independent countries with their own attendant nationalism has significantly diluted this experience.  One is hard-pressed to foresee a return to glory on the field, and even if they did, what would differentiate them from other cricket entities?  Just look at the Indian T20 spectacle.  Love cricket - watch, recognising the multiple nationalities playing as a unit.

The Trinidadians have this over-bearing, suffocating attitude.  The Bajans have this bombastic self-importance.  Both of these nations waste no time in displaying these traits towards Jamaicans.  Remember Kamla Persad-Bissessar and the ATM being out of bounds?  The Bajans and Shanique Myrie?

NO LONGER SUFFER IN SILENCE

As an aside, until these most recent incidents, I was prepared to listen to Sir Ronald Sanders and suffer in silence.  No more.  We need to give the six-month notice and leave CARICOM.  Keep your oil, money, flying fish and population.  We will deal with the world as it is and forge our way therein as best we can.

We have the resourcefulness, aptitude and personnel to make our mark.  Let us use what we have and be inspired by George Headley, up to Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce, Usain Bolt, the Nobel laureate in our midst and those high achievers in the diaspora.

Have you noticed which two countries are usually responsible for put-downs of Jamaica and Guyana?  I, for one, am no longer prepared, on the national level, to engage those who patronise my country and my countrymen.  I would support the repatriation of CARICOM nationals who work in Jamaica.  Parochial, yes.  More jobs for Jamaicans.

The matter of commerce between the countries is predicated on mutual benefit.  Is this the case with Jamaica and CARICOM?

Hell, no.  They see Jamaica as the market to be exploited, not where fair trade exists.  No to Jamaican patties.  Yes to tissue high in bacteria.

Play the fool regarding natural gas.  Pull the plug.  Get the brand name Air Jamaica, then curtail service to Jamaica.

We do not have to buy the biscuits, chocolate, peanuts, tissue and the multitude of other consumables from Trinidad.  There are Jamaican products of similar or superior quality than.  And our local purchases will boost jobs at home.  As for me and my house, we will not buy CARICOM products.

OTHER OPTION

As a member of the legal fraternity, I have given great thought to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).  I understand the need for a final appellate court.

I do have a longing to sever the ties with the colonial power.  Let me suggest that we look at another option.

There is a country in our part of the world that is developed, shares our judicial heritage and philosophy, does not have the baggage of colonial domination, and has proven itself to be a worthy ally of Jamaica.  I have no knowledge that they would be receptive to affording us assent for our final court.

However, we need to cut the ties to CARICOM.  Leaving the treaty will mean exiting the CCJ.  We would be diminished as a court of original jurisdiction for CARICOM trade matters.  Can we give thought to looking to Canada as our final court of appeal?

This may well mean a diminished court.  It may further be reduced if we could recoup the 26 per cent contribution we made to the trust which funds the court.  This totalled US$100 million.

Federation was a bad idea.  It was laid to rest.  CARICOM cannot hope to be viable without some states ceding to the whole some political power.  God forbid that Jamaica should do that.  Political decision-making, however limited?  No way!

The current experiment has to be laid to rest.  For me and my household, we will be at the vanguard of seeing to the dismantling of CARICOM.  I am a proud Jamaican.  I am not a Caribbean man.

Ronald Mason is an immigration attorney-at-law/mediator. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

May 05, 2013

Kick CARICOM to the kerb (Part 2)

Jamaica Gleaner

...the House of Bishops and Standing Committee of the Church in the Province of the West Indies urge Caribbean governments to turn a deaf ear to the international community which encourages same sex marriage

Anglican Bishops Take Strong Stance Against Gay Marriage

Jones Bahamas:




West Indian Anglican Bishops have officially taken a firm stance against same-sex marriage.

During a meeting this past Thursday, the House of Bishops and Standing Committee of the Church in the Province of the West Indies released a draft provincial statement urging Caribbean governments to turn a deaf ear to the international community that encourages same sex marriage.

The body, which is the body of leadership in the West Indian Anglican community, said that they were aware that Caribbean political leaders were being subjected to pressures from nations and institutions from outside the region.

“Frequently they are pressured to conform to the changes being undertaken in their redefinition of human sexuality and same-sex unions, under threat of economic sanctions and the loss of humanitarian aid,” they said.

“We urge our leaders of government and of civil society, as well as the people of our nations, to resist any attempt to compromise our cultural and religious principles regarding these matters.”

The collection of bishops in the region described the international pressure as the ‘dangling of a carrot’ to bring economic assistance to faltering economies, but added that Caribbean governments should not give in.

The bishops also noted that during their deliberations they paid note to the fact that during numerous international forums, the same-sex issue is being pushed as a promotion of human rights, one that must be accepted in a developed nation.

“Frequently, failure to conform by developing nations, like our own, results in the threat of various sanctions, including the withholding of economic aid,” they said.

“More specifically, there is a redefinition of gender to accommodate gay, lesbian and transgendered people, and the creation of a plurality of definitions which leaves the issue of gender to self-definition, thereby dismissing traditional definition of male and female.”

“Additionally, there is the passage of legislation among a number of metropolitan nations whereby marriage is defined as a human right in which any two persons may be joined, inclusive of persons of the same sex,” they added.

The bishops used as a point of reference the Pastoral Statement from the House of Bishops of the Church of England in 2005 which defines marriage as “a creation ordinance, a gift of God in creation and a means of his grace.”

The statement also defined marriage as a faithful, committed, permanent and legally sanctioned relationship between a man and a woman and said it is central to the stability and health of human society.

They also spoke of the cultural and theoretical grounding of Caribbean family life as being between a man and a woman and said the idea of marriage being between two persons of the same sex is “totally unacceptable.”

“While we recognise that the church’s mandate is informed by pastoral and doctrinal concerns and in drawing the attention of the faithful to the source and purpose of marriage, and in solemnising such unions, we accept that governments have the responsibility of providing the kind of legal framework for protecting, but not defining, this most basic social institution on which the stability of society and the socialisation of its members rest,” they said.

“However, the threat and use of economic sanctions are not new experiences to the region’s people, neither is the claim to a superior morality convincing for people who have known the experience of chattel slavery in our past.”

Back in January Archbishop Laish Boyd came under heavy scrutiny after his address to the Constitutional Commission was taken out of context and he was accused of supporting gay marriage.

The archbishop has since dismissed those claims and said that he supports the human rights of all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation, but believes that marriage should remain a union between a man and a woman.

April 29, 2013

The Bahama Journal

Bahamas Blog International 

...poverty and the number of homeless continue to increase in the United States of America (USA)

Thousands of homeless living in tunnels

In the principal cities of the United States, one of the most prosperous countries in the world, thousands of people live beneath the streets, in underground tunnels.

Underneath Kansas City, police discovered last week a group of homeless persons living in tents, in deep underground tunnels. They were removed because of the "insecure environment."

Authorities reported that these individuals lived in misery surrounded by piles of garbage.

It is not clear exactly who these homeless people are or how they dug the tunnels. This is not the only report of this type. In 2010 a story emerged about some 1,000 people who lived in 320 kilometers of tunnels located under the streets of Las Vegas. Improvised furnishings filled the rooms, some had beds, closets and small libraries of books discarded by others.

Journalist Matthew O’Brien reports that these are normal people from all age groups who have lost their way, generally after some traumatic event. He came across the ‘tunnel people’ while investigating a murder, founded an organization to help then and wrote a book about their existence, Beneath the Neon.

He writes that many are war veterans suffering post-traumatic stress syndrome and additionally noted evidence – toys and stuffed animals – that children lived in the tunnels.

Authorities in New York City are constantly evicting persons living in the many tunnels under that city, known as ‘mole people.’ Their attempts to locate all such individuals have, however, failed.

In addition to the thousands of homeless who live in tunnels, there are many living in tents. This is the case of some 80 indigent persons in the New Jersey city of Lakewood, who erected a tent city complete with chickens, a church and piano.

Early in April, residents of the camp reached an agreement with authorities on details of a plan to clear the area, "after the residents have found homes."

Despite all U.S. government declarations that the recession is over and the economy improving, these families are a clear demonstration of the reality that poverty and the number of homeless continue to increase. (Russia Today)

 

Havana. April 25, 2013

 

Granma.cu

 

Bahamas Blog International

 

...The Bahamas offers no protection against discrimination for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons

Report Highlights Gay Man's Murder

By RUPERT MISSICK Jr

A NEW human rights report prepared by the US State Department sites the unsolved 2011 murder of a gay man while pointing out that The Bahamas offers no protection against discrimination for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons.

According to the report, members of the Bahamian LGBT community believe that the June 2011 murder of photographer Sharvado Simmons occurred at the hands of a group of men seeking retribution for a previous incident where Simmons solicited and deceived one of the men while dressed “in drag.”

The report further stated that societal discrimination against gay men and lesbians occurred, with some persons reporting job and housing discrimination based upon sexual orientation.

Although same-sex sexual activity between consenting adults is legal, no domestic legislation addresses the human rights concerns of lesbian, LGBT persons and the 2006 Constitutional Review Commission found that sexual orientation did not deserve protection against discrimination.

The report did admit however, that LGBT NGOs operated openly in the country.

April 25, 2013

Tribune242

Is Dr. Hubert Minnis simply the Interim Leader of the Official Opposition - Free National Movement (FNM) party in The Bahamas?

Interim leader?

Minnis struggles to establish formidable opposition

BY CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Nassau, The Bahamas

Nearly a year after voters delivered a wholesale rejection of the Free National Movement (FNM), the opposition party finds itself in a familiar place — lacking strong, convincing leadership and struggling to stay effective and relevant even with a government that has so far failed to deliver on key near-term promises made on a grueling campaign trail.

The 2012 general election was bitterly fought with high stakes for both the FNM and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP).

Although it made a commendable showing, the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) was never really a major force to contend with.

In some circles, Branville McCartney’s name still comes up when discussions take place about a possible leader for the FNM closer to the next election.

But McCartney, the charismatic head of the DNA, has not in my view proven himself an impressive enough leader, though many applaud him for being brave enough to stand up to Hubert Ingraham and resign from his Cabinet, and tenacious enough to go head to head with Ingraham and Perry Christie at the polls.

The PLP and FNM both headed into the 2012 general election with the same problem: What to do about leadership in the event of a loss.

Neither party had a clearly defined succession plan.

With a win at the polls, the PLP was able to kick the can down the road, but for the FNM, the leadership question became an immediate issue and the party needed a quick solution.

The resignation of Hubert Ingraham from the FNM on the night of the election defeat left many supporters reeling, and some have yet to get over his departure from frontline politics.

The wipeout of most of the former Cabinet put the party in a difficult position as it turned its focus toward identifying new leadership.

The Free National Movement was left fractured and bloodied by the May 7, 2012 defeat, and in shambles by Ingraham’s exit from the political stage, and it had very little options.

For nearly a year now, Dr. Hubert Minnis, the popular Killarney MP, has been doing his best to keep the FNM afloat, but he lacks what is needed to re-energize the party.

It does not help that he still has to work against a very strong pro-Ingraham group within the FNM.

It is likely that Minnis was caught totally off-guard by the task placed before him in May 2012.

He has shown great focus in attempting to put the pieces back together, but he comes on the tail of a formidable force, a towering personality, and it might not be possible for him to provide supporters with the kind of comfort, assurance or strong leadership of an Ingraham.

While Minnis must be respected for his leadership style, and it will take time for the party to adjust, it does not now appear likely that the FNM will go into the next general election with Minnis as leader.

For now, he is playing an important role of attempting to keep all the marbles in the circle until the party is able to identify someone who is able to display the kind of leadership and charisma needed to do battle with the PLP once again.

During the last term, FNMs and PLPs alike acknowledged that Minnis was a strong, hard working and likeable MP.  Today, he remains that.

He uses social media and other technologies to communicate with constituents and is deeply engaged in his constituency.

Minnis lucked out though from having a safe seat, and some observers acknowledged that it would have been very difficult for any FNM to lose Killarney, no matter how unpopular Ingraham and the FNM had become in the lead up to the last general election.

While a good MP, Minnis is not a career politician and was not known during the last term as a standout minister.

His communications in Parliament then, and his contributions to debates now are not engaging or particularly informative.

He does not command attention, and even with all the obvious slip ups of the Christie administration, he struggles to use them to his advantage.

There is evidence that he does try, though.

Last week, the FNM leader called for the government and the police to close down web shop gaming after the chief justice lifted an order that had provided the web shops with temporary legal protection.

But it was hard for Minnis to come off as convincing given his early position that he supported the legalization of web shop gaming in The Bahamas.

One issue Minnis has not gotten credit for though is that he asked pertinent questions about the National Insurance Board on the floor of the House of Assembly long before the matter was on the radar of the media or anyone else publicly.

United

Minnis has had a tough first year as leader of the FNM.

He was forced to prop up an obviously bad candidate (Greg Gomez) in the October 2012 North Abaco by-election.

And he angered some supporters when he declared, “The Ingraham era is over.”

North Abaco was the third consecutive election lost by the FNM and some party supporters still struggle from the hurt and disappointments of those defeats.

While some seem to have gotten a recent boost from growing anti-PLP sentiment in social media, over the airwaves and elsewhere, the road to 2017 will be long.

While it has already been publicly revealed that FNM Chairman Darron Cash had been at odds with Minnis, the two in recent months have been careful enough to display a united approach to opposition politics.

They at least seem to have patched things up.

This is a positive sign.

Opposition parties, of course, turn themselves around all the time.  That is how they win elections.

Following the 2007 defeat, the PLP was a weakened bunch with a leader who had been severely wounded by the defeat.

Christie was identified as the key reason the party lost at the polls, and was advised by experts to effect key reforms if the party was to have any real chance at a 2012 win.

In opposition, the PLP never stopped pounding and it never stopped campaigning.

It benefited from a strong group of former ministers who took their blows from the governing party and never took their eyes off of 2012 and the chance it represented.

Only three members of Ingraham’s last Cabinet held on to seats in Parliament: Minnis; Neko Grant (Central Grand Bahama) and FNM Deputy Loretta Butler-Turner (Long Island), whose best approach to opposition politics appears to be boisterous and disruptive behavior in Parliament.

The other FNM members are Edison Key (the MP for Central and South Abaco who also sat in the previous Parliament), and newcomers Richard Lightbourn (Montagu); Peter Turnquest (East Grand Bahama); Hubert Chipman (St. Anne’s) and Theo Neilly (North Eleuthera).

The FNM of today is reminiscent of the FNM that existed for most of the first term of the Christie administration.

Between 2002 and 2005, the party was led by Tommy Turnquest, who sat in the Senate after he lost the Mount Moriah seat.

The FNM under Turnquest was lackluster and fractured, though Turnquest, like Minnis took the leadership job seriously.

In 2005, Turnquest appointed an advisory council of the party headed by former Deputy Prime Minister Frank Watson to advise on what the party needed to do to win the 2007 election.

The council advised Turnquest that there are many FNMs who want him out and Ingraham back in as leader.

Even today, some FNMs think Ingraham could still successfully return to frontline politics.

For them, there is that nostalgic longing for ‘Papa’.

Hiatus

Earlier this year, Ingraham used a familiar word when he told reporters that he was on “hiatus”.

But when asked the context in which he was speaking, he assured that it was not a suggestion that he planned one day to return to frontline politics.

It was a throwback to his word choice during a public event in 2004.

While addressing a group of administrative professions in Freeport, Grand Bahama, Ingraham referred to his departure from frontline politics as a “hiatus” and said it could stay that way as long as those who were in office advanced The Bahamas and its people.

Following Ingraham’s dramatic return as leader of the FNM in 2005, I recall asking an ever-confident Prime Minister Christie to react to the move.

Christie said Ingraham’s legacy was “on the line” and he vowed to politically cremate him in the next general election.

“I’m really sad that he came back,” Christie said.

“He has placed his legacy on the line and when you place your legacy on the line in a battle with the Progressive Liberal Party – Hubert Ingraham, Perry Christie, however one would wish to look at it – he will lose.”

It turned out that Christie’s prediction was wrong — as least as it related to 2007.

Christie had to wait five more years for the political cremation he foreshadowed.

Strange things do happen in politics.

Five years is a long time for the government to show the electorate what it can and cannot do and for the opposition to show its strength or lack thereof.

We would hope though that the FNM does not this time around feel it’s only real hope is to drag Ingraham out of retirement back into frontline politics.

Ingraham has taken the party far over the nearly 20 years he led it.  He has won three general elections and left in place a legacy of which to be proud.

Minnis is right that the Ingraham era is over.

For the FNM, the decision will eventually need to be made on how long the Minnis era could realistically last.

April 22, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

UN criticizes U.S. detention camp on Guantánamo Naval Base

UNITED NATIONS.— The United Nations has criticized the U.S. government for maintaining its detention center in the illegally occupied Guantánamo Naval Base, despite assurances it would be closed.

In addition, it called on Washington to allow a UN Human Rights Commission delegation to visit the prison, with free and open access and the possibility of speaking in private with the prisoners.

These issues were raised in Geneva on April 5, by Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who condemned the indefinite incarceration of many of the prisoners, which she stated amounted to arbitrary detention.

The official highlighted the cases of prisoners detained indefinitely, some of them for more than 10 years.  This practice contradicts the United States' stance as an upholder of human rights and weakens its position in terms of such violations taking place elsewhere, she added.

The Human Rights Commissioner referred to the prisoners on hunger strike as victims of uncertainty and anxiety caused by prolonged detention.

Similarly, she recalled promises made by U.S. President Barack Obama four years ago regarding the closure of this prison, commenting that systematic abuses of the human rights of individuals continue year after year. (PL)

 

April 11, 2013

 

Granma.cu

Venezuela's dilemma

By Lawrence Powell




In a closer-than-expected Venezuelan presidential election held last Sunday to replace the late Hugo Chávez, opposition candidate Henrique Capriles has refused to recognise the result, calling it "illegitimate" and fuelling violent protests.

Nicolas Maduro, Chávez's preferred successor, received 50.8 per cent of the votes to Capriles' 49 per cent. Voter turnout was high, at 79 per cent, just short of the 80 per cent reached in last October's Chávez-Capriles matchup.

As election results were announced in central Caracas, there were jubilant celebrations by Chavistas, with fireworks and honking car horns. But in the suburbs, Capriles supporters were in an angry protest mood, banging pots and pans loudly in the streets, and lighting fires.

Pointing to what he claimed were voting irregularities, Capriles promptly accused the ruling party of election fraud, and said he will not accept Maduro's victory until a full audit of the results is carried out by the National Electoral Council (CNE). "I don't make pacts with those who are corrupt or illegitimate," said Capriles, who is demanding a manual recount of every single vote cast.

As of Sunday night, Maduro initially said he would gladly accept a full recount. "If they want to do an audit, then do an audit. We have complete trust in our electoral body." Vicente Diaz, one of the members of the electoral council, also publicly expressed support for an audit.

But, by Monday, the narrative had changed, leaving the impression that the government was reneging on its promise. Tibisay Lucena, president of the CNE, announced to the media that all of the proper auditing checks had already been undertaken as part of Venezuela's elaborate standard process of verification, and that a manual recount was, therefore, unnecessary.

Venezuela uses electronic machines to tabulate votes, rather than handwritten ballots. When each vote is cast, the machine automatically issues a printed receipt that confirms, and serves as a record of, that vote. This is more reliable, and less susceptible to tampering, than, say, the machines used in the US, where absence of a printed receipt means one never knows whether the vote was, in fact, registered as you cast it.

As part of CNE's standard protocol, 14 audits had already been conducted before and during the voting process, to ensure correct functioning of the system. CNE had audited a sampling of 54 per cent of the vote, with observers from all parties present - which Lucena explained is "a statistical proportion that in any part of the world is considered excessive".

Citing the importance of maintaining rule of law, she then added that "candidate Capriles ... has refused to recognise the results announced by this body. That is his decision, but in Venezuela a state of law exists which must be respected."

Carlos Alvarez, head of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) observer mission which was present throughout Sunday's voting, also chimed in with assurances that UNASUR had observed "wide exercise of citizenship and freedom" during the election, and that, therefore, "results emitted by the National Electoral Council should be respected, as the competent authority on this matter".

Satisfied with the results of a thorough electronic voting system widely regarded as "the best in the world", Venezuela's five-member electoral commission then smugly announced that the results were "irreversible", and proceeded to declare Maduro the president-elect, with the formal swearing-in ceremony to be held April 19.

This, in turn, further outraged opposition supporters, leading to more protests. There have been at least seven confirmed deaths and 61 injuries so far throughout the country, in the aftermath of the elections.

For Jamaica, what's at stake in all of this post-election haggling is that Maduro is the candidate most devoted to continuing Chávez's generous PetroCaribe arrangements, which provide discounted oil through concessionary loans. To date, Jamaica has benefited to the tune of US$2.4 billion from those arrangements. Even though, as PetroCaribe Development Fund head Dr Wesley Hughes recently indicated, Venezuela may at some point have to review its terms, a favourable arrangement for Jamaica is clearly more likely to survive under a Maduro administration.

Maduro has also agreed to honour Chávez-inspired regional alliances like ALBA (Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America), and to continue pursuing the close relationship and economic exchanges with Cuba. Capriles, in contrast, lacks the Bolivarian ideological commitments that led to all of those regional arrangements in the first place, so would likely consider discontinuing or replacing them.

With such a narrow mandate, and a split nation, Maduro will have a tough time governing during the next six years. The razor-thin margin leaves his political legitimacy less firmly anchored than Chávez's was. That perceived weakness, in turn, provides encouragement for further destabilisation attempts by opponents in concert with the US - something that was constant during the Chávez years and included an unsuccessful 2002 attempted coup.

And there are mounting problems to be solved in Venezuela that have accumulated during the Chávez years - including escalating crime and murder rates, corruption, periodic shortages of food staples, and nearly 30 per cent annual inflation.

In particular, the country's heavy economic dependence on oil - with 95 per cent of export earnings deriving from oil and roughly 45 per cent of government revenues - means that if oil prices should dip on the international market with countries like the US producing more of their own, there will be less in Venezuela's national coffers with which to continue the expensive 'social missions' that ensure votes.

Will a less charismatic, less commanding former bus driver like Maduro be able to overcome all of those challenges, and unify the country's resolve to continue its progressive Bolivarian reforms? As memories of Chávez fade, Maduro will have to develop his own persona, beyond the overworked campaign slogan that he's 'the son of Chávez'.

Lawrence Powell is honorary research fellow at the Centre of Methods and Policy Application in the Social Sciences at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and a former senior lecturer at UWI, Mona. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and lapowell.auckland@ymail.com.
April 20, 2013

Jamaica Gleaner

Bahamas Blog International

Children with autism ... ...A parent's experiences in dealing with an autism spectrum diagnosis for two of their three children

What I have learned about autism

By John Dinkelman

“Your child has autism.” Words that no parent could ever fully be prepared to hear.  Yet for millions of parents each year, they are the unwelcome introduction into a dramatically different world of permanently altered hopes and expectations.

I am one of those parents.

As I take the opportunity during Autism Awareness Month to look back at my experiences in dealing with an autism spectrum diagnosis for two of my three children, I recall that one of the most difficult parts of my experience has been all of the confusing, and often conflicting, information available about the causes of autism.  Additionally, the legion of well-meaning (and sometimes not so well-meaning) people with possible treatments and promised cures – each invariably very expensive and unproven, did little to lessen the pain, or the burden that a diagnosis of autism places on a family.

What we do know is that autism is a spectrum of closely related disorders with a shared core of symptoms.  Autism spectrum disorders appear in infancy and early childhood, causing delays in many basic areas of development such as speech, play, and interaction with others.  The signs and symptoms of autism vary widely, as do the effects.  Some autistic children have only mild impairments, while others have greater obstacles to overcome.

While there are no definitive figures on the number of people affected by autism here in The Bahamas; we do know that the government of the United States monitors such things and that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identify approximately one in 88 American children as being on the autism spectrum.  This is a 10-fold increase in prevalence in the past 40 years.  Studies also show that autism is four to five times more common among boys than girls, with an estimated one out of 54 boys and one in 252 girls diagnosed with the condition in the United States.

To be sure, I am by no means an expert on autism.  But as the father of two children with autism and the husband of a wife who has devoted the last 12 years to learning as much as she can about the disorder, I feel it is my duty to share what I have learned, parent-to-parent, in the hope that others will benefit from my experience.  With this in mind, I offer the following suggestions.

Become an expert on your own child

My wife and I learned through our experience that signs of autism can develop as early as the first year of a child’s life.  As a parent, you alone see and interact with your child each and every day.  So you are in the best position to spot the earliest warning signs of any developmental delay or regression.  All children develop at their own special pace and it is very important for parents to learn what the common milestones are for a child, with the understanding that there can often be a wide range in the timeline for healthy development.  If your child is not meeting the milestones for his or her age, or if you suspect a problem, share your concerns with your doctor or ask for a referral to a child development specialist.  When it comes to any issue related to the development of your child, I recommend listening to your “gut feeling” and do not be afraid to be persistent.

Don’t wait

I have learned that the best thing that a family can do is to seek early treatment with the goal of reducing the disorder’s effects and helping children learn, grow and thrive.  Every parent should seek out reliable sources of information about the treatment options, such as the United States National Institute of Mental Health.  Do not be afraid to ask questions.  Above all, if your child has been diagnosed with autism or a developmental delay, do not risk losing valuable time when your child has the best chance for improvement.  Find a way to get the extra help that your child needs through targeted treatment.

Get support

Oftentimes parents of newly diagnosed children feel as if they are the only ones experiencing the heartbreak of a diagnosis.  Joining an autism support group is a great way to meet other families dealing with the same challenges you are.  Parents can share information, get advice and lean on each other for emotional support.

That is why my wife and I were so pleased to meet other families like ours through the local autism support and advocacy group, R.E.A.C.H. (Resources & Education for Autism and Related Challenges).  Over the last year alone, R.E.A.C.H. has sponsored a series of workshops specifically for families affected by autism, has opened a chapter for families on Grand Bahama, and, through a partnership with Rotary and the Ministry of Education, opened the region’s first preschool classroom equipped to meet the needs of autistic children at Willard Patton Preschool.  The successes through R.E.A.C.H. show the power that we have as families when we work together on behalf of our children.

Enjoy your child’s unique qualities

It was only after my children were diagnosed with autism that I truly began to learn about their unique God-given talents and abilities.  It was also only then that I became sensitive to the entire community of the disabled and began to work to build a more compassionate and understanding community for them.  My wife and I have learned not to focus on how our children are different from other children but, rather, to focus on how important it is to practice love, patience and acceptance.  We make an effort everyday to embrace all our children’s unique talents, to celebrate successes (both big and small), and above all to make sure that they feel unconditionally loved and accepted.  In the end, we are better people because we are the parents of children with autism.

I encourage all parents throughout The Bahamas to take the time to realistically assess their children’s development and, if something seems amiss, to act immediately and decisively to obtain all the assistance their child needs.  In the end, it will make all the difference in the world.

• John Dinkelman is the chargé d’affaires at the United States Embassy in The Bahamas.

April 17, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Martin Luther King, from Dallas to Memphis

By Gabriel Molina Franchossi

THE assassination of Afro-American leader Martin Luther King, April 4, 1968 in Memphis, Tennessee 45 years ago, is considered by many researchers as part of a sinister plot which included the assassinations of Malcolm X, John F. and Robert Kennedy. (1)

In the stormy decade of the 1960’s, the radicalization of those in favor of civil rights, peace and other popular causes had the United States in flames. Two months after MLK’s death, Senator Robert Kennedy was shot. The world had been shocked previously by the November 22, 1963 assassination of President Kennedy and that of Malcolm X on February 21, 1965.

King and Malcolm had challenged the racial segregation which replaced slavery in the United States, abolished by Lincoln during the Civil War. The country’s founding fathers had protected the enslavement of Blacks with a strict legal system of racial separation.

Blacks were crowded into impoverished ghettos and denied access to public facilities reserved for whites, such as transportation, bathrooms, commercial establishments and schools. They were destined to work in the most difficult, low-paying jobs. Afro-Americans’ very limited right to vote guaranteed the stability of the system.

An example of the racism faced by Blacks in southern states occurred on October 19, 1960, when Reverend King was arrested in Atlanta, Georgia, for refusing to leave a department store where he was denied service. A few months earlier in Dekalb County, he had been convicted of a minor traffic offense and given a suspended sentence. The local judge ruled that his arrest in Atlanta provided just cause to revoke this suspension and sentence King to four months of hard labor.

The sentence aroused fear for the Reverend’s life, given what such a punishment meant for Blacks in Atlanta. King was brusquely awakened in his county jail cell, at 4:30 am. With his hands cuffed and legs restrained, he was transported over dark rural roads to a penitentiary deep within Georgia’s countryside. (2)

Georgia Governor Ernest Vandiver received a request to revoke the sentence from John F. Kennedy, a Presidential candidate at the time. His response was that such a move would be politically disastrous in the South, just a month before the elections, asserting that it would mean the loss of at least three states. Robert Kennedy called the judge, who at first criticized the intervention, but the next day, after considering the younger Kennedy’s indignant reaction to the sentence, freed Dr. King.

Committed Black leaders took the lead in the movement against segregation, which employed a variety of resistance tactics, such as sit-ins in public White Only facilities and buses, as well as boycotts of stores and theaters. With new laws supported by the Kennedy’s in place, the struggle intensified. The federal government sent in the National Guard and Federal Marshals to protect King, James Meredith and other leaders when the civil rights movement’s peaceful activists were threatened and beaten by police in states where change was violently opposed.

King and Malcolm X, in particular, became targets, not only of racists but of the national military-industrial complex when the Black and trade union struggle began to radicalize and organize against the war in Vietnam, as was made evident by the 250,000 strong march in Washington where King gave his famous ‘I have a dream’ speech.

This process also had an effect on the Kennedy brothers, whose support for civil rights legislation distanced them from the powerful elite established within the CIA and FBI. J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI, told Atlanta Police Chief Herbert Jenkins that two of the three enemies he most hated were Kennedy and King (3). Robert Kennedy considered Hoover a threat to democracy in the country.

Allen Dulles, head of the Central Intelligence Agency, was so intent on organizing interventions in Cuba and throughout the Third World that Kennedy decided to replace him.

The close surveillance of the four leaders – King, Malcolm X and the two Kennedy brothers – expanded to include persecution and threats which make Dulles and Hoover prime suspects in the four assassinations. They had a motive, the opportunity and the means.

 

(1) James W. Douglass. JFK and the Unspeakable. Simon and Shuster, p. XVII

(2) Arthur Schlesinger. Robert Kennedy and his Times. Random House 1978, p. 233

(3) Ibid, p.280

April 10, 2013

 

Granma.cu

 

Bahamas Blog International

 

Bahamas Government Immigration Policy

A Guest Editorial On Government's Immigration Policy

Tribune242
Nassau, The Bahamas




IN OUR e–mail yesterday, we received “some thoughts for an editorial” from an influential foreign resident, who has spent many years in the Bahamas and has always been most concerned for this small nation’s welfare.

 

Instead of “highjacking” his ideas — as Immigration Minister Fred Mitchell yesterday accused us of doing in the work permit debate — we are going to let this gentleman express his own ideas in this column. After reading this article, Mr Mitchell should realise that we are not the only ones who believe that if the immigration policy — as enunciated by Mr Mitchell— is not softened, then this country is in for a rough ride.

 

We now turn you over to our guest writer:

 

 

AS the debate about the government’s new immigration policy intensifies, it is worth stepping back from the detail and looking at the bigger picture insofar as this contentious issue – if not fully debated and the government held to account – may have a serious effect on the long-term development of The Bahamas.

 

It is already widely accepted in this small country that foreign interests should not be allowed to dominate the local jobs market without adequate protection of the rights of the indigenous work force. Bahamians with the required qualifications and abilities should be afforded opportunities to secure employment in their own country in preference to equally well qualified foreigners; and it is right that government should put in place sensible immigration policies to help to secure this objective.

 

It is a truism, however, that politicians worth their salt should be aware that their approach to any particular issue at the national level, important though that issue may be, must be balanced against other no less important demands, so that judgments are made which are in the best interests of the country as a whole.

 

In this column on April 8, you quoted the FNM shadow immigration minister’s remarks that the government should not adopt immigration policies that might disrupt the way of life of ordinary Bahamians or interfere with the country’s conduct of business. But the government appears hell-bent on doing just that.

 

If it persists in pursuing its new restrictive policy, this will inevitably have a negative effect not only on commerce, industry and economic development but also on countless individual employers. Unreasonable restrictions on the right of a company to determine the nature of its own workforce will scare away foreign investors and affect the profitability of local businesses. This will lead, in time, to fewer job opportunities and more unemployment – a classic case of the law of unintended consequences.

 

This is not just carping by the opposition FNM. It is the view of a wide range of people in this country and it is baffling that leading politicians seem unable to grasp the bigger picture. Can they not see that, while it is their responsibility to protect the rights of Bahamians, this should be done in a careful and proportionate manner and measured against, for example, the continuing need to attract foreign investment?

 

They should face up to two important truths which the population as a whole understands only too well – first, the average Bahamian will not do so-called “dirty jobs” but aspires to something better with the result that foreigners have to be brought in at that level; and, secondly, until the education system is fixed so that young people come out of school with the requisite knowledge and skills to enable them to handle a job at a higher level, employers have to look elsewhere if their business is going to flourish.

 

We cannot escape the conclusion that the new immigration policy has not been thought through properly. It seems that the government is harking back to the Pindling years when the PLP sought the professional and economic empowerment of black Bahamians. This was overtly racist, though in many ways it was the right policy for the times and it succeeded. One has only to look at the range of senior positions that such Bahamians now hold in the financial, insurance and business sectors. But these represented the untapped cream of well-educated people who were equipped to aspire to such positions. Applying the same policies in relation to more menial labour is unrealistic.

 

By and large, intelligent and well-meaning Bahamians across the political and social spectrum want their leaders to show the maturity and self-confidence to accept that, in order to succeed in a globalised world, this nation must move away from parochialism and protectionism. Impending membership of the WTO will create new mandatory obligations and is a step in the right direction, but the country needs to open up more generally.

 

At this point in its development, The Bahamas has to diversify and expand its economy in order to prosper. Our political class should work out a sensible and effective means of utilising foreign know-how and labour – when there is a need to do so and it is to our advantage – while at the same time protecting the aspirations of the country’s own people.

 

There must surely be a better way of working towards this than making crude remarks about turning down work permits “cold turkey”.

 

April 12, 2013

 

Tribune242

 

Bahamas Blog International

 

Continuity and Change in the post-EPA Caribbean

What is required to ensure regional survival in a new world

BY KESTON K PERRY
Jamaica Observer



THE ensuing debate and what some might call tabanca, related to the CARIFORUM-EU Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), are very worrying.

It would seem that observers and analysts have adopted the position that the European Union (EU) and its agents are evil, and should be called out for their malicious and iniquitous transgressions against puny counterparts in the Caribbean, who have little chance of engaging the former colonial masters on equal terms. Ironically, in the same breath, many have praised the recent fortune of Antigua and Barbuda in securing an unprecedented victory against Goliath-- the all-powerful United States. The discussion on being assertive and enhancing internal capacity seem to missing from many recent commentaries. Instead, it would seem the age-old dependency and% vulnerability rhetoric have taken centre stage, diminishing and obscuring important resolve to stimulate the necessary dynamism to ensure some modicum of competitive adaptation to the situation that has now befallen the Caribbean.

Within the context of globalised trade reciprocity, it is foolhardy to persist in a mode of requesting concessionary measures from either the EU or other trading partners. Unfortunately, any beggar-thy-neighbour principle cannot be enforced or resurrected within the present global political economy in which Caribbean small island states do not possess internal dynamic or geo-economic clout.

In this ongoing saga of finger-pointing we need to ask ourselves what has truly brought the region to this point and how we should actually be responding.

Prior to 2008, the English-speaking nations within Caricom had enjoyed exceptional preferential treatment for more than 30 years, first from Britain, as ex- colonial polities, and latterly the European Union through market access and guaranteed price levels for their goods. Belal Ahmed, in a 2001 report, highlighted that Caribbean sugar and banana industries — the mainstay of many of the Windward islands — suffered from a number of challenges, inter alia, a lack of technologically intensive production methods and resultantly improved productivity, labour issues, limited crop diversification, little research and development support and downstream activity. Though globalised markets and liberalisation affected regional producers, it could be argued the solutions to many of these issues could have been controlled by and were within the reach of the territories themselves.

Despite being challenged by WTO rulings and possessing concessionary market access, the evidence shows the required quotas for bananas or sugar to Europe had, on several occasions, not been sufficiently met. Perhaps the attendant capacity was not put in place, which resulted in significant revenue losses. Cotonou (1975-2000) and Lomé (2000-2008) come to their inevitable end. However, why did we not put the necessary mechanisms in place while regional producers benefited from concessions? It may be argued, as Sonjaya Lall and others have suggested, that trade preferences tend to retard dynamic capability and result in uncompetitive, sheltered industries. Perhaps, in the case of the EPA negotiations, the strategies may have faltered, negotiators outwitted or the bluster of civil society actors ignored. Alternatively, perhaps, the negotiators were overconfident that the regional private sector policymakers would get their act together in time to ensure competition on an even keel. But what are the reasons for our failure in achieving economic targets over the years and effectively implementing our industrial policy regimes to diversify exports? Though the main sectors have shifted to services, very little has been done to reduce dependence on a single industry, seek niche areas with high potential returns, or to proactively adapt to global developments by moving into higher value-added manufacturing linked to improved technology based on cumulative learning.

We need to examine other perspectives and seize opportunities with respect to indigenous technological capability and learning. To date, the anti- EPA camp has marginally considered areas of innovation, learning and cumulative capacity building in their arguments. Scholars like Carlota Perez argue that the windows of opportunity for development are constantly shifting along with the techno-economic paradigm or technological revolutions. In what ways have Caribbean private sector companies taken advantage of the Internet age in innovating and differentiating their products? The issue of market access would certainly be relevant once there are goods and services of a high calibre to trade, and are constituted with technological inputs that would attract the demand to render them competitive in the EU market and elsewhere.

In this regard, greater access to technological and supply networks could be negotiated through well-placed members of our diaspora. Could it be that complacency become entrenched as a result of meagre economic growth spurts over the years? Moreover, the failure of our regional academic institutions to inculcate broad-based and integrative thinking in their charges, and consequently inspire context-specific and region-wide action cannot be overlooked. In addition, the efforts at building relevant research and action-driven capacity to leverage and take advantage of the information revolution in meaningful ways, based on failed policies, can certainly have some sway.

Sadly, many learned observers, despite their experience and knowledge, remain blinkered by outdated perspectives. As a young researcher, I am bemused and remain uninspired by the course of the debate to date. The Washington-based institutions may have kicked away the ladder, but the East Asian tigers (South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, and to a lesser extent Malaysia and Hong Kong) doggedly continued their campaign to develop market-ready microelectronics, software, ICTs, manufacturing, and other service-oriented sectors. Despite their initial teethong problems, they learnt over time and ensured that the lessons learnt were part of their subsequent economic strategy. Are we afraid that this new episode in our economic history will expose the inadequacies of our analyses and development prescriptions? That, in fact, our present situation may be a consequence of the frailties driven by academic and policy insularism, perpetrated at our highest regional institutions?

This EPA exposé related to ill-prepared Caribbean states and private sector stakeholders has constrained regional actors from taking on the world and adapting to the demands of globalisation, even though leading analysts have acknowledged the Caribbean region as part of the global economy for the last 500 years. Why then have we not got our act together or learnt lessons during the post-independence era? It is rather simple to blame the politicians, the political system, the structural deficiencies of the global economy which disadvantage small states, the EU, the negotiators, the negotiating machinery, the regional institutions, and all and sundry, than to take a serious introspective look at the discrepancies and short-sightedness of our analyses and policy prescriptions, and even our own efforts to take action in our own time and sphere of influence. Which academic or writer will ever admit fault or retrospectively state that their analyses were inadequate for fear of being relegated to irrelevance, especially in a small-island context? But, as Plato suggests: "The learning and knowledge that we have, is, at the most, but little compared with that of which we are ignorant." The shameless blame game and the weeping and gnashing of teeth surrounding the EPA must come to an end. Those who do not wish to get their hands dirty need no longer speak from their soap boxes. We need to break ourselves out of the mould of victimhood and re-assert our God-given character of resilience and capacity for "creative" agency. Our actions must be well considered and evidence-based, and the net must be cast wide enough to capture ideas and knowledge that will do justice to the cause. It is high time we cut our losses from this saga and take that brave step forward to engage the world.

Keston K Perry is a student at Newcastle University Business School (NUBS) in the UK pursuing an MSc in Innovation, Creativity and Entrepreneurship. His research involves the potential catalytic role of Caribbean diasporic entrepreneurs in terms of transnational learning, entrepreneurial activities and technological resourcing capabilities and their implications on innovation and public policy in Trinidad and Tobago.

innovation.tt50@gmail.com

@kestontnt

http://kestontnt.tumblr.com

Jamaica Observer

April 10, 2013

Bahamas Blog International

Conchservation in The Bahamas... ...the Sustainability and Preservation of the Bahamian Conch Population

'Conchservation' Campaign Set For Full Launch

 

 
By NATARIO McKENZIE

Tribune Business Reporter
nmckenzie@tribunemedia.net




A “CONCHSERVATION campaign” is set to be fully launched nearing the end of this month according to Bahamas National Trust (BNT) executive director Eric Carey, who said that there would a national dialogue on the sustainability and preservation of the Bahamian conch population.

Speaking at a press conference to announce the upcoming inaugural Abaco Business Outlook, Mr Carey said: “The conchservation campaign is up and running. We are going to have a full launch of that programme on April 27 working with Ms Elaine Pinder, Frankie Gone Bananas, the Bamboo Shack franchise, Kalik etc. The objective is sustainability whether your talking businesses and economy, conch or grouper, the objective is to ensure that Bahamians can always enjoy these things. We are fortunately not in a position we ever have to sound crazy alarms about conch. We believe that we can continue to eat conch as a important food, culinary icon and part of tourism culinary picture. We still have enough conch to continue to enjoy which is why we want to act very quickly to ensure that we don’t reach a point where we have to go to extremes that Bahamians find untenable.”

The Bahamas currently exports some $3.3 million, or 600,000 pounds, worth of conch per annum. A 2011 report by Community Conch, an organisation involved in the sustainability discussions, revealed that juvenile populations in important Berry Islands nursery grounds had “declined 1,000 times to a few hundred individuals in 2009” when compared to 1980s numbers. As for Andros, of the eight historic fishing grounds surveyed, only one in 2010 had a large enough adult conch population to permit reproduction. And, in Exuma, Community Conch found that the adult conch population on Lee Stocking Island had fallen by 91 per cent between 1994 and 2011, with the bank population in the Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park off by 69 per cent over the same period.

Mr Carey said that no conclusion had been drawn on whether to ban conch exports. “We have drown no conclusion on anything. An important aspect of it is going to be a national dialogue. When we met with the Prime Minister and we spoke about conch we assured him that we would take the discussion and conchservation national to make sure that there is broad scale understanding of the issue and any measures we have to suggest to the government will have the support and buy in from fishermen,” said Mr Carey.

April 08, 2013

Tribune 242

Bahamas Blog International

.

Jamaica: Money madness - sliding dollar ... J$100 to US$1

Nedburn Thaffe, Gleaner Writer



With the exchange rate expected to reach the dreaded J$100 to US$1 mark this week, consumers who have over the past few years done their fair share of belt tightening will be forced to buckle up even further and continue to hold strain.

Those consumers' dilemma results from the continued dwindling effect the sliding dollar is having on their ability to purchase goods and services.

Already the mumbling at cashier counters in supermarkets in the Corporate Area have become more pronounced.

Upset and outraged over the amount of money they have had to fork out for basic necessities, even religious zealots who scope out supermarkets to spread the 'good news' have been changing the tone of their message in keeping with the times.

"Jesus warned of condition like this. That was the reason why He said we should pray for our daily bread. It was only under the rule of (King) Solomon that everybody was satisfied," one Jehovah's Witness shared with a consumer outside one supermarket The Gleaner visited in the Corporate Area recently.

Verbal attacks directed at politicians for their management of the economy over successive decades were common on the lips of several persons who emerged from the supermarket in the early afternoon.

With plastic bags in hand, one shopper, who asked not to be named, was obviously not in a good mood after realising that she spent more than she bargained for.

"Three thousand-odd dollars and mi nuh get half a weh mi want yet," the Seaview Gardens resident lamented. "Mi did waan three sardines and a only one mi could afford. You nuh see seh the country mash up?"

The elderly woman reflected on a time when she was able to take J$40 to any supermarket and take home "one box a grocery with chicken and everything".

Those days, she recalled, were in the 1980s and during that period trading of the Jamaican currency did not escalate beyond the J$6.50 to US$1 mark, according to information gleaned from the Bank of Jamaica website which documents the history of the exchange rate.

"That time mi used to do domestic work in Havendale (St Andrew) and every weekend mi would buy grocery fi carry go give mi children dem down di country (Clarendon)," she said.

She recounted how in 1988 she bought a "five-draw, good-size dresser" for J$1,000. The record shows that year the dollar trade highest at J$5.54 to US$1.

Additionally, in 1991, with just J$1,500, the Seaview Gardens resident purchased a brand new divan bed which she possesses to this day. That year trading of the currency started showing signs that there was trouble on the horizon, with the dollar ending the year at J$21.57 to US$1.

Twenty-two years later, she would have to take no less than $18,100 to a furniture store to purchase a similar bed.

"You caan go nowhere with that kind of money now. The amount of things this J$3,500 weh mi just spend could give mi. Mi would have to call taxi and truck fi remove them," she said.

"See it deh, all now no meat kind, no flour, no sugar not in mi bag."

Rose Plummer, who lives alone, said shopping for items once every week has worked out better for her.

According to Plummer, all Jamaicans will have to learn to "cuff and curve" in this time whether they like it or not.

"I can remember paying J$100 for bread, now it's J$250," she said.

"What is going on in the country is sin why all these things happening. We, as a nation, have to go back to God. Portia Simpson cannot solve this problem; this bigger than her. Andrew Holness cannot solve our problem. The dollar flowing like it's at Caymanas Park or stadium and is only Jesus can help us. We have to turn back to Jesus," Plummer charged.

For J$1,597, with discount included, 45-year-old Samuel Wilson was able to stock up on a few snacks which he expected to be enough for his daughter who attends basic school.

"Before the end of the week, I have to come back. Ten years ago, mi could a carry home more than a trolley of grocery with di said amount of money but right now things gone way out of proportion," he said.

"Right now, when mi a buy snack for my daughter, it's no less than J$2,000. It's because mi have a discount card why I get it for this price. It's just by the mercies of God mi survive but it could be worse. God is taking care of me and my family."

nedburn.thaffe@gleanerjm.com

April 08, 2013

Jamaica Gleaner

Bahamas Blog International

The duty to avoid a war in Korea

Reflections of Fidel

 

(Taken from (CubaDebate)

 

 

A few days ago I mentioned the great challenges humanity is currently facing. Intelligent life emerged on our planet approximately 200,000 years ago, although new discoveries demonstrate something else.

This is not to confuse intelligent life with the existence of life which, from its elemental forms in our solar system, emerged millions of years ago.

A virtually infinite number of life forms exist. In the sophisticated work of the world’s most eminent scientists the idea has already been conceived of reproducing the sounds which followed the Big Bang, the great explosion which took place more than 13.7 billion years ago.

This introduction would be too extensive if it was not to explain the gravity of an event as unbelievable and absurd as the situation created in the Korean Peninsula, within a geographic area containing close to five billion of the seven billion persons currently inhabiting the planet.

This is about one of the most serious dangers of nuclear war since the October Crisis around Cuba in 1962, 50 years ago.

In 1950, a war was unleashed there [the Korean Peninsula] which cost millions of lives. It came barely five years after two atomic bombs were exploded over the defenseless cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which, in a matter of seconds, killed and irradiated hundreds of thousands of people.

General Douglas MacArthur wanted to utilize atomic weapons against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Not even Harry Truman allowed that.

It has been affirmed that the People’s Republic of China lost one million valiant soldiers in order to prevent the installation of an enemy army on that country’s border with its homeland. For its part, the Soviet army provided weapons, air support, technological and economic aid.

I had the honor of meeting Kim Il Sung, a historic figure, notably courageous and revolutionary.

If war breaks out there, the peoples of both parts of the Peninsula will be terribly sacrificed, without benefit to all or either of them. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was always friendly with Cuba, as Cuba has always been and will continue to be with her.

Now that the country has demonstrated its technical and scientific achievements, we remind her of her duties to the countries which have been her great friends, and it would be unjust to forget that such a war would particularly affect more than 70% of the population of the planet.

If a conflict of that nature should break out there, the government of Barack Obama in his second mandate would be buried in a deluge of images which would present him as the most sinister character in the history of the United States. The duty of avoiding war is also his and that of the people of the United States.

Fidel Castro Ruz

April 4, 2013

11:12 p.m.

Granma.cu

Bahamas Blog International