Petrocaribe has stood the test of time ... ...thanks to the legacy left by Hugo Chávez

Maduro: Petrocaribe has stood the test of time

DURING the 7th PETROCARIBE Summit of Heads of State and Government, held in Caracas after the 9th Ministerial Council, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro said that the organization had stood the test of time, thanks to the legacy left by Hugo Chávez.

The President proposed the idea of designating a number of currencies, such as the SUCRE (the Unitary System of Regional Compensation), or other formulas, to facilitate trade among PETROCARIBE members.

The Summit approved the full membership of Honduras and Guatemala, in line with the goal of strengthening regional integration in the energy sector, according to Prensa Latina. Also agreed upon was the scheduling of a Summit in Nicaragua this coming June 29, on the eve of the organization’s eighth anniversary.

The Summit was preceded by an Energy and Finances Ministerial Council meeting. Venezuelan Minister of Oil and Mining, Rafael Ramírez, reported that the necessary conditions were in place for the functioning of the PETROCARIBE Economic Zone, another tool to promote ongoing sustainable, harmonious development in the region.

PETROCARIBE’s energy agreement, with 18 countries participating, has facilitated social progress, going beyond the supplying of oil on the basis of flexible financial terms. For example, its ALBA-Caribe Fund has provided more than $179 million for the execution of 85 projects in 12 nations. Through this fund, finances have been made available to advance access to healthcare, education and housing, as well as promoting economic development.

PETROCARIBE was founded in 2005 and includes Antigua & Barbuda, the Bahamas, Belize, Cuba, Dominica, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Nicaragua, St Kitts & Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent & the Grenadines, Suriname and Venezuela.

Leaders attending the 7th PETROCARIBE Summit paid tribute to Chávez, visiting the Montaña Garrison, on the two month anniversary of his death.

CUBA EMPHASIZES PETROCARIBE’S IMPORTANCE TO DEVELOPMENT

The creation of PETROCARIBE represents an integrationist response to mitigate the asymmetry generated by neocolonialism in the Caribbean, said Ricardo Cabrisas, Vice President of Cuba’s Council of Ministers, in his remarks to the Summit, according to PL.

Under the leadership of Chávez, PETROCARIBE was an "original and audacious idea" which, from the beginning, sought to go beyond merely distributing oil, to promote collaborative energy policies.

According to Cabrisas, Chávez foresaw a comprehensive project, which would support cooperation in programs of social impact, in addition to facilitating access to oil supplies.

Cabrisas further commented, "It is our responsibility to guarantee the continuity of this collaboration between sister peoples facing the crisis of the world economy, of energy, food, the environment and ideas."

May 09, 2013

Granma.cu

Bahamas Blog International 

...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

 

 

Bahamas Blog International

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