...ethical stem cell research and therapy “holds tremendous potential for The Bahamas.”

Gov’t In Stem Cell Pact

By Macushla Pinder
The Bahama Journal
Nassau, The Bahamas




The government is hoping to partner with the University of Miami (UM) to certify and assist in policing stem cell research activities in The Bahamas.

Prime Minister Perry Christie led a delegation to Miami this week to meet with UM President, Donna Shalala and other senior research experts.

President Shalala served as Secretary of Health and Human Services under former US President Bill Clinton for eight years.

According to Attorney General Allyson Maynard-Gibson, who was also on the trip, it was agreed that a working group would be appointed to fully explore how the two sides would work together on the issue.

“Both President Shalala and the prime minister indicated their intention to have that working group nominated in the shortest possible time – certainly within this month – to have the working group named,” Minister Maynard-Gibson said in an interview with the Bahama Journal on Thursday.

“President Shalala said we would operationalise the legislation meaning we would get going on the collaboration and cooperation….President Shalala and others are all extremely excited about the opportunities that exist for collaboration between The Bahamas and the University of Miami not only in the area of stem cell research and therapy but also in terms of medical services,” the minister explained.

Stem cells are “mother cells” that have the potential to become any type of cell in the body. One of its main characteristics is its ability to self-renew or multiply while maintaining the potential to develop into other types of cells.

But despite its potential, parliamentarians are divided on the issue, as evident during ongoing debate the Stem Cell Research and Therapy Bill.

The proposed legislation is expected to create a regulatory regime covering all aspects of stem cell research including testing stem cells in people and on clinical research. This includes bench research in laboratories as well as non-human animal research.

It will also prohibit and deter procedures that are unethical or scientifically unfounded, such as human reproductive cloning.

The overall idea is to make The Bahamas a highly respected world leader in stem cell research and therapy.

“We want to be seen to be associated with and recognised by the highest persons in the stem cell arena nationally and internationally,” Minister Maynard-Gibson said.

The government has established a National Stem Cell Ethics Committee, which according to the minister, will be comprised of highly qualified and respected local and international leaders.

“Some of the people we hope to attract are people who are at leading universities like Duke and Harvard universities. We also have a Scientific Review Committee, so that everyone who intends to conduct stem cell research and therapy must be subjected to procedures,” the minister explained.

But according to Opposition Leader, Dr. Hubert Minnis, the government’s decision to team up with the UM seems to be “some form of recognition by association” on the thorny issue.

“This is something we’ve been talking about,” Dr. Minnis said.

“The government now recognizes the deficiencies moving forward in terms of enforcement, regulation and monitoring what they want to do. They’re a lot of issues facing the country today so why rush with this particular issue. Is there some special interest group that they are trying to satisfy and they must do it? Why the rush?

“Miami’s stem cell programme is clinical research which is FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approved. Clinical research means that patients do not pay for the research being done. One has to ask the question, will we embark on clinical research and if that’s the case, will patients be charged. If not, what is Miami’s involvement? This has to be answered.”

It is questions like these why the Free National Movement (FNM) leader is pushing for the Stem Cell Research and Therapy Bill to be sent to a committee.

The idea, he said, is for the issue to be further discussed so that “all the enforcement and proper regulatory process would be in place.”

“We don’t want our country to be blacklisted four or five years down the road,” Dr. Minnis said.
But Minister Maynard-Gibson said the mere fact that professionals from places like the UM are willing to come to the table and understand the mutual benefits speaks volumes.

In response to the suggestion that the bill be sent to a committee, Mrs. Maynard-Gibson leaned on comments made by noted cardiothoracic and vascular surgeon and FNM Deputy Chairman, Dr. Duane Sands, who has thrown his support behind the controversial procedure.

According to Dr. Sands, ethical stem cell research and therapy “holds tremendous potential for The Bahamas.”

Debate on the Stem Cell Therapy and Research Bill is expected to continue when the House resumes on August 7.

2 August, 2013

Jones Bahamas

Bahamas Blog International

Did Marcus Garvey fail?

Was Marcus Garvey Preaching to The Wrong People?

BY MICHAEL A DINGWALL:

WHEN Marcus Garvey was urging us black people to take charge of our own destiny and become great, almost a century ago, some admired him, while others thought he was some sort of quack.  In this season of Emancipation and Independence, one has to ask: Was Garvey preaching to the wrong people?

At the time when he was preaching, my race, the black race, was the most insignificant on the planet.  Africa was under the control of Europe.

We blacks in the West were totally dependent on the great white powers for our very existence.  Garvey didn't think that black people should be at the bottom of the barrel — being so insignificant and dependent.  In this respect, he was one very unusual black man indeed.

I strongly suspect, though, that Garvey would have still felt the need to preach the same message today, almost a century later.  Though we blacks have made some progress, we still have a very long way to go.  While some of that progress has been had through the efforts of other peoples, other things haven't changed at all.

Take black Africa today.  While preaching, and even before, Africa was controlled by the Western powers.  Her natural resources were being maximised to the fullest to the glory of these powers.  Africans on the continent were either powerless to alter the then situation or willingly gave away these resources.

The same is true today.  These days, it is China that is maximising the resources of Africa to create a Chinese superstate.

Just as it was in the days of slavery, when we gave away our own for trinkets, we are still doing the same today.  The trinkets then were used kitchen utensils, old clothes and even cats; while today, they are cellphones, laptops and shiny new cars.  Garvey would have buried his head in shame at the way his message has been ignored.

We in the West also really didn't give two cents about his message either.  Our island nation-states in the Caribbean are too insignificant to influence any global issue, except entertainment.

Maybe Garvey meant we should be great entertainers; as that is the only area in which we seem good.  Nothing great in governance, science and technology can be truly attributed to us black people -- as we keep our exploits to ourselves, or sell them still for trinkets. Garvey would be very disappointed indeed.

We demonstrate how contrary we have been to his message by our actions.  We think our own universities are worthless.

As such, we crave for the Oxfords, Cambridges, Harvards, and MITs.  We think our music is good only when it is validated with an American Grammy.  We see our societies as totally hopeless — which explains why we fight so hard to get visas to live in the white paradise of North America and Europe.  What was that "Africa for Africans" message again?

I said before that Garvey would have been disappointed, but I sometimes wonder.  In the end, it seems, even he became a realist and realised that he may have been preaching to the wrong people after all.  When the time came for him to retire, he didn't choose his Jamaican homeland or his African would-be homeland.  No, looking at things realistically, he decided that the best place for him after all was Britain.

Maybe the reason he failed to convince us black people that we can be a great people is not only because we think he was nuts — maybe he never really believed his own message either.

July 30, 2013

Jamaica Observer

Latin America in U.S. line of fire

By Laura Bécquer Paseiro

Revelations made by former CIA analyst Edward Snowden have opened a Pandora’s box and created an international scandal which could easily continue for some time. The United States government’s vast espionage network has not only focused on U.S. citizens, but various countries around the world as well, including many in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The Brazilian daily O Globo recently published documents describing in detail the U.S. surveillance program in the region, which apparently was not only devoted to gathering military information, but commercial secrets as well.

The newspaper reported that U.S. espionage targeted the oil and energy industries in Venezuela and Mexico, and that the most spied-upon country in Latin America was Brazil. The documents indicated that another priority target was Colombia, where surveillance focused on the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces-Army of the People (FARC-EP). Other countries which were continually monitored, albeit to a lesser degree, were Argentina, Ecuador, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, Paraguay, Chile, Peru and El Salvador.

According to the documents obtained by O Globo, between January and March this year, U.S. National Security Agency personnel monitored the region using at least two programs: Prism - which allows access to e-mail, online conversations and internet voice communication provided by companies such as Facebook, Google, Microsoft and YouTube - and X-Keyscore which can identify the presence of a foreign visitor in the country based on the language used in e-mail messages.

Demands made by Latin American countries that the Obama administration provide an explanation of its participation in the incident with Bolivian President Evo Morales’ airplane, reflect regional indignation. Statements from a variety of leaders described the events as unacceptable violations of international law.

SNOWDEN’S REQUESTS FOR ASYLUM

Speaking with Granma, Cuban professor Alzugaray commented on offers of asylum made to Snowden by Venezuela, Nicaragua and Bolivia, saying that no other region in the world is in a better position to take such a stance vis-à-vis the United States. Latin America and the Caribbean, he emphasized, have been a primary target of U.S. intelligence operations and have suffered first hand the consequences of this policy for some time. Although Snowden’s revelations surprised no one, denouncing such espionage is a way of letting the U.S. know that it cannot act with impunity in the region.

The professor pointed out that the Snowden case has brought attention to the expansion of ‘national security’ operations both within the U.S. and internationally, and to the practically unlimited power intelligence organizations have acquired. Some sectors within the U.S. government have reacted with panic, concerned with what more Snowden could reveal, while others have attempted to distance themselves from the phenomenon, he said.

The 29-year-old technician who leaked details of the government’s secret surveillance of telephone calls and internet messages is for Dr. Alzugaray "a time bomb that could explode at any moment and oblige the administration and Congress to review and reduce the autonomy of these intelligence organizations, from Homeland Security to the NSA, the CIA, the FBI and others.

Snowden is not, however, the only concern. The list includes Bradley Manning, the soldier who sent Wikileaks thousands of diplomatic e-mails and other documents about the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, who is currently being prosecuted in military court.

U.S: spying around the world is nothing new. The Spanish daily La voz de Galicia recently summarized the numerous precedents, going back to the Civil War (1861-1865) when Abraham Lincoln authorized supervision of information transmitted by telegraph. His Secretary of War Edwin Stanton invaded the privacy of citizens, detained journalists and decided what messages could be sent.

Professor Alzugaray recalled the warnings issued by U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-1961) about the power of the military-industrial complex and the Church Committee hearings after the Watergate case and the war in Vietnam.

He commented that the Snowden case appears very similar to that of Daniel Ellsberg who revealed the Pentagon Papers in the 1970’s, "Ellsberg himself commented to the Washington Post that the U.S. is not the same as it was in his time and that Snowden’s flight was totally legitimate. It is no surprise that many governments and progressive political forces are sympathetic to the young man and are wiling to offer him asylum."

Given the situation, an unrepentant U.S. government continues to keep an eye on its southern neighbors, putting them in its line of fire. 

July 23, 2013

Grama.cu

Bahamas Blog International 

...there are 20,000 to 50,000 undocumented Haitians living in The Bahamas ...while the number of registered Haitian migrant workers is only 5,000

Haitians: Up To 50,000 Living In Bahamas Without Documents

By Rupert Missick Jr
Tribune 242
Nassau, The Bahamas

ACCORDING to exploratory research on trafficking in persons in the Bahamas conducted by the International Organization for Migration, there are  20,000 to 50,000 undocumented Haitians living in the Bahamas while the number of registered Haitian migrant workers is only 5,000.

#It is estimated that more than 13,000 dependent family members are supported by these registered migrant Haitian workers.

#But it is the statistics quoted by the IOM’s report with regard to the children of these migrants that seems to bring a human face to one of the most pertinent issues discussed by the recent Constitutional Commission report with regard to the right to Bahamian citizenship.

#The IOM says that the majority of undocumented persons entering the Bahamas are Haitian children up to the age of 14, who apparently travel with parents. It is the status of these children and those born in the country to Haitian migrants who enter the country illegally that the Commission addressed its attention when it examined the issue of statelessness in the Bahamas.

#It highlights a fact, brought to its attention by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which explained that several provisions of the Constitution might have the effect of creating a class of persons who are stateless.

#These parts of the Bahamian Constitution, according to the UNHCR, are not only contrary to various international agreements it has acquiesced to but also problematic in light of The Bahamas’ obligations pursuant to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

#The Commission admitted that Article 7 of the Constitution effectively reduces many persons to a “situation of effective statelessness, as the persons who are primarily affected are either unwilling or unable to avail themselves of the other nationality to which they are entitled. Needless to say, the majority of persons who fall into this  category are children born in The Bahamas to Haitian parents.”

#Many persons have argued that these children are not stateless and are in fact entitled to Haitian citizenship. However, the Commission points out that the realities of the situation are not as simple as that.

#The Haitian Constitution allows a person to obtain citizenship if they have at least one parent who was born in Haiti and who has never renounced their citizenship. So, on the surface, persons born in The Bahamas to a native-born Haitian parent who has not renounced Haitian citizenship would become a Haitian national at birth.

#However, the claim to Haitian citizenship by descent is limited to the first generation if their parents fall short of these criteria.

#The commission points out that even where persons falling into this category are entitled to Haitian citizenship, most choose not to acquire Haitian passports, as in any event they would be required to renounce that citizenship at 18 to acquire Bahamian citizenship. The Haitian Constitution forbids dual Haitian and foreign nationality.

#However, the commission believes that the 18-year period for persons born in the Bahamas to non-Bahamian parents to become eligible for citizenship is too long.

#While the requirement was intended to coincide with the age of majority, when the claimant would be capable of choosing which nationality they wish to take, the commission said that it is assumed that during the interval, the person would be able to hold the nationality of some other country.

#This, the commission said, was never the intention of framers of the Bahamas Constitution that persons in those circumstances would be rendered stateless.

#The Commission acknowledged the enormous “psychological, socio-economic and other ill-effects that result from leaving large groups of persons in limbo in relation to their aspirations for Bahamian citizenship.”

#“Not only are the affected individuals badly damaged and marginalized, the entire society is put at risk and its future compromised by having within its borders a substantial body of persons who, although having no knowledge or experience of any other society, are made to feel that they are intruders without any claim, moral or legal, for inclusion. Such feelings of alienation and rejection are bound to translate into anti-social behaviour among many members of what is, in effect, a very large underclass in our society,” the commission said.

#It was frequently suggested to the Commission that persons born in the Bahamas to non-Bahamian parents should be given a more formal status, such as permanent residence,  until they reach the age of majority and are able to apply to be registered as citizens.

#“The difficulty with this is that permanent residence (with limited exceptions) is only available to persons who are of the age of majority, which is also when the entitlement to  citizenship arises under Article 8,” the Commission said.

July 29, 2013

Tribune 242

Bahamas Blog International

Abortion And The Stem Cell Bill in The Bahamas

Your Say: Abortion And The Stem Cell Bill

By PASTOR 
CEDRIC MOSS
Nassau, The Bahamas

 

WITH alarm and sadness, I listened to and read the comments of Dr Duane Sands about illegal abortions that are performed in the Bahamas.

 

I was alarmed because Dr Sands spoke with such certainly about illegal abortions taking place in this country, but never once did he hint his objection to this illegal practise, nor did he indicate that he has provided the police with whatever information he has about these crimes.

 

Certainly, since he is a lawmaker, there is a higher duty on Dr Sands to do all that is in his power to see that our laws are upheld, even if he happens to disagree with any of them as they presently stand.

 

Dr Sands is quoted as saying, “Just like numbers, Bahamians want to stick their head in the sand and not grapple with this very vexing issue that demands a national consensus, introspection to decide whether we believe that women in the Bahamas in 2013 ought to have the right to choose, since they are choosing now.”

 

However, what Dr Sands seems to miss is the reality that, while it is common knowledge that illegal numbers houses brazenly break the law because the government and police allow them to, only he and other insiders are aware of the illegal abortions taking place in this country.

 

Therefore, I and countless other Bahamians are not burying our heads in the sand about illegal abortions; unlike Dr Sands and other insiders, we just do not know.

 

In addition to being alarmed at Dr Sands’ comments, I’m saddened by them.

 

Dr Sands speaks about the killing of innocent babies through abortion using the sanitised language of women’s “right to choose”.

 

Right to choose what? To kill their babies? The sad, unvarnished truth is that since abortion on demand started in the USA in 1973, approximately 56 million babies have been killed there.

 

Worldwide, since 1980, it is estimated that approximately 1.3 billion babies have been killed through abortion.

 

Based on Dr Sand’s revelation, included in the worldwide estimate are perhaps tens of thousands of Bahamian babies similarly killed thorough abortion.

 

While everyone everywhere should have freedom of choice, no one anywhere should have the right to kill unborn children through abortion on demand.

 

Human life begins at conception, and societies show their civility and their fear of God (the Creator of all human life) by protecting it.

 

Dr Sands’ revelations about illegal abortions taking place in the Bahamas got me thinking more about stem cell research and therapy.

 

Clearly, Dr Sands’ testimony points to the inability (or the refusal) of the government and its agencies to effectively regulate and oversee medical practitioners.

 

Therefore, while I personally support ethical stem cell research and therapy (ie, using adult stem cells and stem cells from placental and umbilical cord blood), I have grave reservations about how effectively this activity would be regulated and overseen in the Bahamas.

 

If the wanton abuse of our anti-abortions laws is any indication (and I believe it is), I think it is reasonable to conclude that if the Stem Cell Research and Therapy Bill is passed, there will be those who, in an unhindered way, will illegally engage in activities that destroy, harm, and manipulate embryonic human beings (ie, embryonic stem cell research and therapy which the current bill claims to prohibit, but which will thrive in an environment where easy abortions are the order of the day).

 

And then years later, we will have a medical insider telling us that what the law actually prohibits in the area of stem cell research and therapy is actually taking place, so we might as well legalise it.

 

In light of this very likely abuse (and for a few other less important reasons), I oppose the passage of the Stem Cell Research Therapy Bill that is before parliament.

 

While still alarmed at and saddened by Dr Sand’s comments, I rest in the truth of Psalm 2 that reminds all leaders that they are subject to the Sovereign Lord, and that while God is patient to act, he is not impotent to act, and he will indeed act.

 

He alone is the Creator of life, and as his creatures, we should value human life and uphold human dignity. We all ignore this to our peril.

 

Cedric Moss is senior pastor of Kingdom Life Church. Please send comments to cmoss@kingdom-life.org.

 

Tribune 242

 

Bahamas Blog International

 

Peter Nygard's Relationship with the Bahamian Government creates Unwelcomed Perceptions

A worrying affair

Billionaire’s relationship with govt creates unwelcomed perceptions

By Candia Dames
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com

In the world of politics, the power of perceptions can never be overstated or overestimated.

The government went into overdrive in Parliament last week, defending its dealings with the controversial Finnish-born, billionaire fashion designer Peter Nygard, who is a permanent resident of The Bahamas residing at Lyford Cay.

But it was trailing behind the bad public relations it had already received on the matter.

The perceptions created by Nygard’s “Take back The Bahamas” video, his flamboyant frolicking with government ministers and his hero’s welcome in Grand Bahama on Thursday renewed debate on money in politics.

The controversial video was one of several that made the rounds in social media last week.

That video showed Nygard celebrating the Progressive Liberal Party’s 2012 general election win while watching Prime Minister Perry Christie’s victory rally address.

Nygard proclaimed as he watched, “Yes. We got our country back.”

Later in the eight-minute video, a group of new Cabinet ministers is shown at Nygard Cay for a meeting with Nygard.

Some of the ministers involved have branded the visit as casual and blasted the Free National Movement’s claim that it proved that the government is too compromised to govern.

Although at the time the spark failed to erupt into anything significant, the firestorm over Nygard has its genesis in a claim made by Opposition Leader Dr. Hubert Minnis more than two weeks ago, that the government was bringing a stem cell bill merely to appease Nygard.

Strangely enough, Prime Minister Perry Christie responded to that accusation when he raised the issue at Jones Communications Network’s “40 under 40” awards luncheon on July 12.

Nygard was present as he received an award for his contribution to youth development in The Bahamas and later told the crowd that Christie was a great prime minister who deserved full support for his programs.

In comments that seemed misplaced for the event, Christie explained that Nygard had approached him while he was leader of the opposition and explained that he would attract experts in stem cell therapy and research to The Bahamas if legislation is passed.

A newspaper supplement from the Junkanoo Corporation of New Providence last week that featured Nygard, said he gets anti-aging stem cell therapy four times a year.

The video that made the rounds last week shows him injecting himself with something, but it was unclear what it was.

Another video that went viral shows Nygard walking the streets of Bain Town a few weeks ago.

He was accompanied by prominent pastors Bishop Simeon Hall and Rev. Dr. Philip McPhee and others.

The group stopped outside the church of Rev. C. B. Moss, who has been promoting his Save Clifton message for well over a decade. Clifton is a stone’s throw away from Nygard’s compound, Nygard Cay.

Moss is urging the government to reject what he said is an application from Nygard to lease newly created land in the area.

In that video, Nygard bizarrely proclaims: “I have been dedicated to this country more than any single person in this whole country. There’s testimonial after testimonial.”

With the controversy over Nygard raging, Minister V. Alfred Gray, one of the ministers in the “Nygard Takes Back The Bahamas” video, declared to reporters last Tuesday, “Mr. Nygard is a Bahamian.

“He is a philanthropist, and I think he has given more to this country than many other Bahamians, including those who criticize him.”

In the House of Assembly the following day, government officials corrected that statement, saying Nygard is a permanent resident.

This came amid debate on the stem cell bill. For hours on Wednesday, the Nygard matter distracted from the substance of the debate as minister after minister flew on the defensive.

There is no doubting that Peter Nygard has made substantial contributions over the years to sports and youth development.

He has also acknowledged he financially helped both the Progressive Liberal Party and the Free National Movement.

In an affidavit last year, he said he was a “major backer” of Perry Christie and the PLP.

Christie has said that because donors expect anonymity, it is not for him to say who donated to his campaign and how much.

Legally, he has no obligation to make such disclosures.

Montagu MP Richard Lightbourn’s “word on the street” claim that Nygard pumped $5 million into the PLP’s campaign was just that — hearsay.

But there is a certain uneasiness, an unsettling element to Nygard’s cozy relationship with the Christie administration.

The government it seems will not take the approach and move the Nygard matter under the radar.

On Thursday, Nygard landed in Grand Bahama to great fanfare. He was greeted at the airport by Minister for Grand Bahama Dr. Michael Darville and other officials.

Miss Grand Bahama was also on hand, and there was a Junkanoo rush-out with a banner proclaiming, “Grand Bahama welcomes Peter Nygard”.

Darville said Nygard was there to attend a youth conference he sponsored and was also a guest of the Grand Bahama Port Authority. He said Nygard was in town to discuss business opportunities.

The laying out of the red carpet and Junkanoo greeting received by Nygard appeared excessive and unnecessary and fanned the flames of a still brewing controversy.

When was the last time the prime minister received such a grand welcome to Grand Bahama, or has he ever?

Christie and his ministers broke no law in their dealings with Peter Nygard, but the prime minister ought to be worried about the kinds of perceptions the whole affair is creating.

Pointing to Ingraham administration dealings with investors and raising criticisms in this regard is not enough.

No, it is not enough to point out what the government said is a double standard in how it is treated compared to the treatment received by the former administration on these matters.

Ingraham and the FNM were sent packing last year.

The Nygard issue is yet another distraction for Christie, and it hints at the nasty Mohammed Harajchi scandal, which erupted under his first term in government.

 

Scandal

In diplomatic cables reported on by The Nassau Guardian two years ago, the Americans either had a fascination with The Bahamas’ lack of campaign finance laws, or deep concerns about this, because they widely discussed the issue of money in politics in their cables to Washington, DC.

They noted in a 2004 cable: “Both of The Bahamas' two major political parties live in glass houses when it comes to campaign contributions.”

The cable traced the Mohammed Harajchi controversy — a situation in which political contributions backfired in a very nasty and public way.

The Iranian businessman claimed that he had been approached, either directly or via intermediaries, by “90 percent of the (Christie) Cabinet” for campaign contributions, had helped to refurbish PLP headquarters, and had underwritten several PLP political rallies, among other things.

Harajchi denied that his contributions (allegedly $10 million) were designed to gain reinstatement of his bank's operating license, which had been revoked in 2001.

At a press conference, the PLP emphasized that it is neither illegal nor improper for political parties in The Bahamas to accept donations from individuals, and highlighted attention on Harajchi's confirmation that he had received no favor or promise in exchange for his financial donation.

Christie promised a full accounting of Harajchi’s contributions to the PLP, but never provided any information in this regard.

In a 2006 cable, still on the subject of money in politics, an American diplomat wrote that it is “widely accepted” that the government’s extradition of convicted drug dealer Samuel ‘Ninety’ Knowles would lead to “withdrawal of an important source of election funding”.

“As one Cabinet minister observed, there are no controls or limits other than the conscience of the politician,” the diplomat wrote. “In addition, money can come from any source, including international donors.”

The cable said millions of dollars were allegedly obtained from “questionable sources” in the 2002 campaign.

 

Financing

The need for a law to govern campaign financing is something many politicians have discussed over the years.

In 1980, a comprehensive proposed act “to make provision for the registration of political parties; for the regulation and control of political contributions; for the public funding of elections and for other purposes incidental thereto and connected therewith” never made it to the halls of Parliament.

Perhaps it’s because there was no political will to do so.

More than 30 years after the campaign finance bill was drafted, there are still calls from some politicians — and from other Bahamians — for a law to govern money in politics.

Last week, Christie said it is something he is willing to address, but he has said that in the past many times.

While he was prime minister, Hubert Ingraham said he did not believe that campaign financing laws are necessary, adding that the government cannot “legislate honesty”.

However, Ingraham said he would have no difficulty whatsoever disclosing the sources of his political financing.

Ingraham invited a team of officials from the Organization of American States to observe last year’s general election.

That team has recommended “the adoption of a legal framework on the financing of political parties and campaigns in order to enhance the accountability, transparency and equity of the democratic process”.

Whether the current administration will adopt this recommendation, remains to be seen.

No matter how hard the current government pushes back on the Nygard affair, it is leaving a bitter taste in many mouths.

Nygard it appears has been given the keys to the country, but the government has stressed repeatedly that it is not for sale.

It is now for the prime minister to strike the right balance between welcoming him as a prospective investor while fighting against any perception that he is wielding undue influence because of his contributions to the PLP and various national causes.

Even if it is only a perception that he is wielding influence, that perception could be damaging for Christie and his government.

Christie ought not let arrogance on the part of his ministers cause this controversy to get any more out of hand.

July 22, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Abortion — Jamaica needs a real SOS

BY ANDREW KING:

THE World Health Organisation study suggests global abortion rates are steady at 28 per 1,000 women a year. However, the proportion of the total carried out without trained clinical help rose from 44 per cent in 1995 to 49 per cent in 2008. Unsafe abortion is one of the main contributors to maternal death worldwide, and refers to procedures outside hospitals, clinics and surgeries, or without qualified medical supervision. Women are more vulnerable to dangerous infection or bleeding in these environments.

In developing countries, particularly those with more restrictive abortion laws, most abortions are unsafe, with 97 per cent of abortions in Africa described this way. In comparison, 95 per cent of abortions in Latin America were deemed unsafe, falling to 40 per cent in Asia, 15 per cent in Oceania and nine per cent in Europe. To compile the figures -- often a difficult task in countries where abortion is illegal -- the researchers at the Guttmacher Foundation used surveys, official statistics and hospital records. They concluded that, while the abortion rate had fallen since 1995, that drop had now levelled off, and overall, the rise in world population meant that there were 2.2 million more abortions in 2008 compared with 2003.

In the Caribbean, Cuba followed the communist world in legalising abortion; Puerto Rico is part of the USA where abortion is legal and Martinique, Guadeloupe and the French side of St Maartin have legal abortions. Barbados became the first country in the English-speaking Caribbean to introduce abortion legislation in 1983 with the passage of the Medical Termination Pregnancy Act. The Act permits legal abortion to save the life of the woman, if the child is likely to suffer severe abnormalities, for rape and incest, to protect the physical health and mental health of the woman, and for social and economic considerations. Doctors are also expected to provide those seeking abortions with counselling, the scope of which is outlined in the regulations. The Government of Guyana, in 1995, enacted the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, the Act stipulates that abortions can legally be done, but there are conditions that must be met. In Guyana, abortions must be done by a qualified medical practitioner who is certified to conduct the procedure. The Act also requires the termination to take place in a safe place. Women who wish to terminate pregnancies undergo a strict process whereby they are counselled and told about the pros and cons of such an act. Those women are also given 48 hours to talk with her friends and family and the partner who has caused the pregnancy to make that decision.

Studies have revealed that 1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons, that is the child is unwanted or inconvenient. The truth is, in Jamaica, one of the greatest cycles of injustice against our children has been allowed to continue. One of the causes of child abuse is the bringing into the world children by parents who are unable to cope, did not want or plan the conception, or in other ways had no business having children due in part to their inability to take care of them, and the lack of proper parenting skills.

The Government has to spend more than $436 million to operate eight Government-run children's homes and places of safety. In her sectoral presentation, Minister Hanna reported that the "weekly cost of $13,000 per child or $676,000 per child per year. We currently have 334 children at these facilities." This is simply unsustainable. Correct this historic wrong.

abking020@gmail.com

July 22, 2013

Jamaica Observer

Bahamas Blog International