SENATE OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE BAHAMAS
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12th, 2008

Madam President

Over the past 10 months many Bahamians have stated this FNM government is the most reckless, irrational, insensitive, incompetent and costly elected government in the history of the Bahamas. This FNM government under the “proven leadership” of The Rt. Honourable Hubert Ingraham has made one blunder after the other and in doing so has strengthened the proverb “that without vision the people will perish”.
Madam President
This Government has cost the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars by their arrogance, ignorance and incompetence. We are here today to discuss numbers so let me begin with 2 numbers; 500 million and zero.
500 million dollars or half a billion dollars is what the FNM government with “proven leadership” has cost the Bahamas in 10 short months. Let me explain.
1. 200 million dollars is the amount our external reserves have been depleted in the last 10 months. When the PLP left office in May 2007 external reserves stood at 682 million, the best it had been in 2 years. It is now hovering around 500 million.
2. 100 million dollars is the cost to the Bahamas from the reduction of our GDP growth rate from 4.5% to 3% for 2007. Our GDP was 6.2 billion in 2006 and 4.5% growth meant that our GDP would grow by approximately 300 millions dollars; that is the amount of new money that was supposed to added to the economy. We lost 1/3 of this 300 million dollars (4.5% to 3%). Hence 1/3 of 300 million is100 million dollars.
 

3. 100 million dollars in the reduction in excess liquidity in the banking system. When the PLP left office in May 2007 Excess liquidity stood at 248 million dollars, the best since 2004. Excess liquidity today stands around 150 million dollars.

4. 90 million in stop suspend review and cancelled contracts.

Yes Madam President half a billion dollars in 10 months. 200 million in external reserves, 100 million from downgrading of economy 100 million in reduced liquidity and 90 million in contracts to local entrepreneurs. That’s 50 million dollars a month. Can you believe that? It’s a disgrace. The Prime Minister and the FNM should be ashamed. How could they let this happen? Can you imagine 5 years of this? That’s 2.5 billion dollars.

Madam President
Let me now turn to the number zero. Zero is the number of government houses this administration has built since coming to office. Mind you when they were first in office in 1992 they only built 51 in their first 4 years. Zero is the number of programs they have instituted to address crime. Zero is the number of initiates they have put forward to revolutionize our educational system. Zero is the number of ideas they have put forward to transform our economy. This sums up the FNM’s government performance over the past 10 months, Zero, nothing, nada, zilch, one big duck egg. They have cost the country 500 million dollars and have not come forth with one meaningful program, initiative or piece of legislation to address the concerns and problems facing this country.
Madame President
All of this mounting evidence points to one simple conclusion, that this FNM government with their “proven leadership” is simply incompetent. Why do you think that they are smiling in this picture as they enter that other place to commence this debate. There is nothing here to smile about. Our economy is in decline, crime is out of control, socially we are on the brink of total disaster, we are graduating students who cannot read write and do basic math and they have the audacity to smile when they are doing nothing to address these pressing concerns and in fact they are now part of the problem themselves. Bahamians go to bed hungry every night, food prices are now through the roof, the price of fuel has increased the cost of living substantially. Bahamians can’t pay their mortgages, can’t pay their light bill, can’t meet school fees and they are smiling. What are they smiling about? Well I will tell you why I think they are smiling. No matter how much they mess up they still get paid, their health insurance is paid for them and if they are Cabinet Ministers their family as well. When they leave that place they will go on pension paid for by the very same Bahamian people to whom they have given poor representation. The bottom line is they are straight and as I pointed out during the Amendment to the Prime Minister’s Pension Bill when the Prime Minister leaves office again his $200,000 per annum pension will resume. Don’t get me wrong they are busy, just not busy doing the things that the Bahamian people sent them there to do.

Madam President
During my last contribution of 2007 I made 10 wishes for 2008, one of which was that we would come here and address some meaningful and much needed legislation, I am now convinced that it was just that a wish and a dream. One whole year and what have we done? Nothing. They want to talk about transparency and accountability. What a joke.

Madame President

That’s why I like dealing with numbers.  The numbers don’t lie, they are objective, they have no bias, they don’t affiliate with any particular political party or philosophy, religion, gender or examine the pigmentation of skin.  The FNM is understandably uncomfortable when dealing with numbers when they relate to their government’s watch, because the numbers are not been kind to them.  As a result they prefer to focus on smoke and mirrors, diversions and distractions, but when dealing with numbers and this economy, they either go quiet or try and distract Bahamians from the real issue.
 
Madame President
I am amused when I listen on the radio and read the newspapers and even the debates in that other place and now this place, how the FNM Government attempts to diminish the relevance and importance of the economic and fiscal prudence the PLP brought to our economy during its last term in office.
I read a series of editorials some weeks back where the editor of the one of the dailies took issue with comments made by the Member for Bain and Grants Town at the PLP Convention where he pointed out in particular that the PLP had done an excellent job managing the economy of The Bahamas.  The Prime Minister himself in that other place endorsed that view during his contribution to the Budget in May of 2007. I was tempted to respond to the editorials and correct the many inaccuracies but the last time I did that and pointed out inaccuracies made in the editorial with regard the Amendment to Prime Minister’ Pension Act the editor chose not to print my letter.
 
Madame President
I have noticed recently what now seems to be a deliberate attempt by some to muddy the waters by calling into question the state of the economy in May 2007 when the PLP left office.  This of course, will bode very well for the FNM as they will be able to say, “See, things weren’t as good as they said they were when they left office and hence the freefall of the economy is not entirely our fault.”
 
Madame President
The major problem with that is that the facts and the figures support the view that in the past ten months the FNM has done an awful job of managing this economy.
Madam President
The Bahamian economy had momentum in May 2007 when the PLP left office. The momentum  was significant. I see where the Bank of the Bahamas where the Government is the majority shareholder even used the theme momentum for its 2007 annual report. I stated earlier that is May 2007, foreign reserves were nearing $700 million.  Bank liquidity was up to $250 million.  Government revenue was at an all time high.  And let me make this point just to put the Government revenue in perspective.  In 1997, the FNM Government revenue was $736 million.  In 2002 when the FNM left office, the Government revenue was $857 million, an increase over the 5 years of 16 percent or 3 percent per annum.  During the five years the PLP was in power from 2002 to 2007 the Government revenue increased from $857 million to $1.34 billion dollars, an increase of 56 percent over five years. In other words during the FNM second 5 year term revenue increased by 16%, whereas during the PLP’s 5 years from 2002 -2007 revenue increased by 56%.That’s  an average increase of 11 percent per annum. In other words during the FNM second 5 year term revenue increased by 16%, whereas during the PLP’s 5 years from 2002 -2007 revenue increased by 56%.
Madame President
Now what we must also take into consideration is that when the PLP came into power in 2002 our GDP rate of growth was 0.8 percent, that is less than one percent and, undoubtedly, the country was experiencing difficult economic times.  This is bearing in mind the fact that during the year 1998 under the FNM Government, our country experienced the greatest GDP economic growth of our history of 6.8 percent in that single year. However, in 4 short years it had steadily reduced to less than one percent by 2002 when the PLP returned to office. Can you believe that, 6% drop in GDP growth in 4 years. That’s an average reduction of 1.5% drop per annum. Does this 1.5% number sound familiar (4.5%-3%). This swift 6 % decline led the then Governor of the Central Bank to state that the then FNM Government had “squandered” a golden opportunity.  What he meant by that is that having achieved such a tremendous rate of growth, the then FNM Government was either not able to maintain or increase our rate of growth, but instead we saw a steady and swift decline.

Madame President
What is so astounding about the growth in our revenue during 2002 - 2007 – this 56 percent increase in revenue I referred to earlier during the five years the PLP was in office, is  when you consider the two fundamental principles which affect Government revenue.  The first is that no new taxes were imposed on the Bahamian public – secondly, the Government actually gave tax concessions to Bahamians in the form of (1) duty-free import on materials to many Family Islands; (2) duty-free concession to taxi and livery car owners on the importation of their vehicles to improve our tourist product and (3) the stamp duty exemption on first home owners for properties valued under $250,000 dollars. The FNM Government has ceased all of these and it is still unable to match the PLP revenue numbers.

Madame President
I am not sure whether one needs a more compelling case that the PLP government not only had a handle on the economy, but they were building the economy. The facts and figures support the view that they got it right and  actually knew what they were doing. The same can’t be said of the FNM. In support of that you only need compare the economic record of the PLP during 2002-2007, to the record of the previous FNM Administration and this present FNM Administration. No long story, no smoke and mirrors, no political optics, just simple mathematics and hard cold facts.

Madame President
At the rate this Government is going, having taken away all the incentives that the PLP put in place in the economy to spur economic growth, and now threatening to increase taxes, I have no doubt that what we experienced under the previous FNM administration, we are experiencing under this present administration with its proven leadership. Unfortunately Our rate of economic growth is declining and it will continue to do so. It has already declined by one and a half percent under this Government and I suspect that it will decline even further this year by a half to one percent. We will be fortunate in 2008 if our growth rate is above 2 and a half percent. That is below the 3 % as projected by Standards and Poor which the Prime Minister has refuted. He can refute all he wants, the writing is on the wall.

Madame President
I want to put this in perspective. When the PLP came to office in 2002 the FNM had left an anemic rate of growth of less than 1 %. When the PLP left office in 2007 the PLP left the FNM with a rate of growth of 4.5% and a similar projected rate of growth for the 2008 and 2009. In one short year they have reduced that to 3% or less and there is no plan for recovery.  This is what the Prime Minister had to say on page 10 in the Mid- Term Statement in relation to his government projected 4% growth rate for 2008.
“While we note with concern the views of Standard & Poor’s, framed as they are in the general context of a U.S. and global downturn which is not yet certain, we are not yet persuaded to downgrade the growth rate, in view of the fact that it was not a particularly dynamic rate in the first instance.”
 

Madame President
Two interesting points come out of this statement. First the Prime Minister is stating that 4% is “not a particularly dynamic rate” well I hope he will now accept that the fact that the growth will probably be less than 3% that his FNM Government has failed the Bahamian people. Secondly, it is interesting to note than when our GDP growth rate was downgraded to 3% last year the Minister of State for Finance was saying that 3% growth was good, even when our neighbors in the region were growing last year by an average of 5% and here we have the Prime Minister saying he is not satisfied with 4% growth. This is the problem with the FNM Government, you never know what is real. How can you trust them, when they can’t even get their story straight.
 
Madam President
Based on the revenue numbers coming forth for the first six months, it is virtually impossible for the Government to reach its revenue projections for this fiscal year.  And it’s even more likely that the revenue numbers for this year will be below what they were in 2007.  People are asking, “How could this happen?”

Madame President
I go back to what I said during the Budget Debate back in June 2007 and I have repeated many times inside this place since then that “the leopard cannot change his spots” and “some people never learn”.  History is a great teacher and history has shown that if this FNM Administration does not make some major change to its thinking and philosophy, we are headed down the same disastrous path they took us down between the years 1997 and 2002. Some of us are not surprised at this dismal performance. Barak Obama puts it best when he says how can you expect to send the same people back to do the same job and expect a different result.

THE MID-YEAR STATEMENT
Madame President
If the following statement by the Prime Minister were true I could understand and appreciate the purpose behind this mid term budget
“The Mid-Year Budget Statement on the other hand, is concerned primarily with how the current fiscal budget is actually performing in relation to the plans and projections put forward as the Government’s goals and objectives in the Budget Communication.” Unfortunately, the Government has brought us here again to waste our time and waste the people’s money.  I will explain it as simply as I can.  Firstly, apart from the capital expenditure, this mid term budget is essentially taking the expenditure numbers from the original budget and dividing them in half.  So these numbers are not real numbers – the Government itself does not know what the real numbers are! This is confirmed by the Prime Minister when he stated in that other place on page 20 of his Governments mid year statement.
“Not all of the underspending in recurrent expenditure of $75 million arising in the first half of 2007/08 will result in realized savings at the end of the fiscal year.  In the six month cycles, some under-expenditure could easily arise from even brief administrative delays in expenditure implementation.”
Madam President
But yet they come in this place and say that although revenue is down by $50 million for the first six months, expenditure is down by $75 million and they cannot explain why the expenditure is down or even if it will be spent during the second half of this budget year.  The issue I have, is that we do now know if expenditure is in fact down as a result of their failure to pay bills which they are now accruing for and have decided to defer payment until the second half of this budget year, or whether there were capital works or improvements that were necessary and they failed to carry them out.  You see, it is quite easy, Madame President, for you and I to develop a surplus in our bank account if we stop paying our bills, if we stop buying groceries, if we stop making our car payments, stop maintaining our houses and cars. What we have to be careful of here is that the Government has not brought us here to debate this matter as a pure public relations exercise to conceal certain facts and distract the public from the fact that almost a year has passed and this government has accomplished absolutely nothing of significance.

Madame President
This is now our third budget debate of the year and the fourth budget debate will be upon us in 2 months.  With all the issues and concerns that require urgent attention in this country, this Government has wasted a complete year because they have no vision and they had no meaningful agenda. They have also wasted valuable civil service employees time. Listen to what the Prime Minister had to say on page 4 of the Mid- Year Statement.
“I would also like to emphasize that the preparation of the data on government expenditure and revenue for the Mid-Year Statement has placed considerable responsibility on the Accounting Officers and Principal Receivers of Revenue throughout the Public Service, and on the senior financial managers in the Public Corporations.  In the case of the Public Service, these persons are the highest ranking officials and are usually Permanent Secretaries and Directors of Departments, and are appointed as Accounting Officers and Principal Receivers of Revenue under the Financial Administration and Audit Act.  The Mid-Year Budget Statement imposes a heightened awareness on these senior managers in the Public Service and on the senior managers in the Corporations of the importance of strict financial management and controls. They must analyze and monitor their agencies’ budgets closely and brief their Ministers accordingly”.
Madam President
They have now involved the entire senior level of the public service in this meaningless exercise as if senior civil servants have no other responsibilities than preparing for budget debates.  Instead of getting on with the people’s business, they have spent a good part of this year debating budgets, appropriation bills and mid-term budgets and in doing so have only emphasized the fact that they do not understand our economy. The remainder of the year they have spent digging up in files trying to find something on the PLP. One whole year digging up in files. I am still waiting to find out who the PLP insiders were who were involved in the Sale of BTC.
Madame President
Two sentences on page 17 point out to me very clearly that this government is lost when it comes to managing our economy.
“My Government’s strategy is to steer The Bahamas towards a situation where there is no risk to our economy from having a high level of Government debt arising from a sequence of major fiscal deficits. My Government has given great weight to these issues and we are convinced that the Bahamian public, international institutions and investors in our economy will endorse our strategy. We have progressed far along this road but we have further to travel.” I have news for the FNM government and their proven leader, our expenditure can not reduce without impacting our infrastructure and much needed social programs and unless they find ways to increase government revenue we will have deficits and our debt will increase. The challenge for them is to increase revenue as the PLP did without increasing taxes and imposing a greater financial burden on the Bahamian people. I hear their strategy but I am at a lost as to how they will achieve it. No answers here in this Mid-Year Statement. I can say though that if history is any indicator, the FNM Government’s strategy is flawed as they are not focused on what they should be focused on and that is on new revenue. This approach of cutting here and cutting there can only affect our infrastructure and much needed social programs and shows quite distinctly another fundamental difference with the PLP and the FNM. They value things and we in the PLP value people.  A press statement released by the Progressive Young Liberals responding to the Prime Minister’s lack of concern and support for the National Youth Program is prime example of necessary and relevant programs which are being discarded by this uncaring government. I would like to read this statement and accept it as my own.

“We, the Progressive Young Liberals were appalled, upon hearing Prime Minister Ingraham’s remarks on the National Youth Service implemented under the former Christie Administration, and directed by talk show host, Jeffery Lloyd.

It appears that Mr. Ingraham has interest in cutting the National Youth Service because $871,000 is too much to invest in a youth rebuilding program. We are saddened by the fact that our Prime Minister would devalue the efforts of such a service simply because the number of youth participants isn’t as large as he would like.

We believe that progress is made in this country if one young person has decided to change their course and head in the direction of prosperity and success. Many times, programs are implemented with the intention of reaching out to thousands of young Bahamians at a time, but fail to reach one. However, if we were to take a smaller approach, reaching out to little at a time, the effects would be far more fruitful. This is what we have seen in the National Youth Service, in collaboration with the YEAST (Youth Empowerment and Skills Training) program. The fact of the matter is that the program, as every other program the FNM has sabotaged, was working.

Mr. Ingraham, however, saw fit to place emphasis on his position that saving the life of a young man is not worth $13,000 a year, and 65 lives being changed for the better is not a significant factor to the country’s overall growth.

The Progressive Young Liberals support the National Youth Service and commend them for the difference they have made in such a short time. It is quite apparent that many young Bahamians are attempting to redeem themselves in school and in other aspects of their lives, when given the chance and the direction that Mr. Lloyd and the managers of the program have achieved. As we saw with the last two students murdered, there can be no price tag on the life or the redemption of our young people and for the FNM to, on one hand support discussions with youth on crime and then have the Prime Minister come back less than a week later to throw away a group of young Bahamians shows just how disingenuous the government is being. The youth of this nation must be more than a photo opportunity or a vote to win for the FNM. These are young lives that were being instructed in the right way by a program started by the Catholic Church and supported wholeheartedly by the PLP while in government.

It is the view of the Progressive Young Liberals that $13,000 is not nearly enough to spend saving a generation of youth. We call on the government to reconsider what Mr. Ingraham is foreshadowing and allow the program to remain intact, if not better funded.

The Minister of Youth cannot be silent as his leader seeks to tear down one of the few programs that are left. They have already gutted and bastardized Urban Renewal until it is only a caricature of its former self. For the sake of our youth, we call on the government to not allow the same fate to fall on this program.

With many teens being murdered and some in jail for murder, the government should seek to invest more into the National Youth Service rather than expressing a disinterest in youth empowerment. This shows that they have no concern or care for young Bahamians and only view us as window dressing and votes.”

Madam President
You would agree that this is a very well written letter. We in the PLP are proud of our youth arm. They are engaged, focused and clearly appreciate the relevant national issue. The future of the PLP will be safe in their hands.

Madam President
The Bahamian people have caught on to the FNM’s PR game. They have caught on to the one liners and political optics that the Prime Minister of this country has engaged in.  They are tired of it, I am tired of it.

Madame President
This FNM Administration with it’s proven leadership has only completed 8 percent of its Agenda as outlined in its 2007 Speech from the Throne.  I for one was very encouraged by their legislative agenda as outlined in the Speech from the Throne and I was pleased that I was going to be a part of making some meaningful contributions to those debates as we moved in this place to enhance and propel the advancement of The Bahamas and our people.

Madame President
Needless to say, the Bahamian people are greatly disappointed, I am greatly disappointed that so much time has been wasted in that other place and in this place. I am disappointed that so much of the people’s money has been wasted and that this Government has the audacity to come here and talk about accountability and transparency. They are single handedly making a mockery of these words.

Madame President
All I can say is that it is very transparent that this Administration has implemented no meaningful legislation during this session and that they will be held accountable by the Bahamian people sooner rather than later.
CANCELLED CONTRACTS
Madame President
What about the 90 million dollars worth of contracts given to Bahamian entrepreneurs that were stopped, reviewed and cancelled. You would recall the straw market contract. I am advised that today that contact has not been cancelled. I am also advised that the Attorney General advised the government on the Governments legal position and still nothing. I have invited the Attorney General to address this issue before in this place and invite her again to address it as I see no provision in this mid term budget for a law suit that has been filed by one contractor against the government or provisions for the possibility of exposure to further liability by other contractors. I would consider it reckless if the government has received advice as to the extent of their liability and they have refused to make provision for this potential liability. What ever happened to transparency and accountability? Is this just a catch phrase? Does the FNM Government think if they repeat it enough Bahamians will believe it.
 

MINISTRY OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
Madame President,
I will now turn to the former Ministry of Financial Services and Investments which you will recall during the Budget Debate I commented extensively on.  I stated that it was a mistake for the Government to abolish this Ministry and you will also recall that the Leader of Government Business defended his Government’s position by saying that it was now a department within the Ministry of Finance.  I stated then, and I quote,
“As a result of the concerns raised by those in the financial sector and representations made by senior members of that industry to the Right Hon. Perry Christie where they were able to show that the financial services industry in The Bahamas contributed somewhere between 25 to 30 percent or $1.5 billion to $1.8 billion to the GDP of The Bahamas second only to tourism which contributes around 40% or $2.3 to $2.5 billion, the PLP  listened to the advice and rationale of these seasoned professionals and the Right Hon. Perry G. Christie agreed that the Ministry of Financial Services and Investments should be separated from the Ministry of Finance so as to address the policy and regulatory needs of our second most important industry and also to ensure that the focus and attention that it deserved was received so that what happened under the FNM’s watch - where the entire financial services market was on the brink of collapse - would not happen under the PLP watch.
THE FNM under the Prime Minister has dismantled this Ministry and brought it back into the Ministry of Finance.
Some people never learn.”
 

Madam President
Imagine my surprise then when flipping through the 2008 Bahamas Handbook I came across an interview with the former Governor of the Central Bank, Mr. Julian Francis, which took place on August 24th, 2007, and I will quote what he had to say in regard to the abolition of the Ministry of Financial Services and Investments:
The question was “It seems like we are constantly playing a game of catch-up”.  The former Government responded by saying, “If I were to be at all critical – which I don’t really wish to be – it would be to say that we are not doing enough, and we are not as focused on what needs to be done to get there.  We are still ‘allowing’ things to happen.
Let me give you a concrete example of that, which some will not like.  We established five years ago a Ministry of Financial Services.  I don’t believe that the Ministry focused sufficiently on financial services, actually.  But it was a start, and I thought it was really an important step when it happened.  I don’t believe we should have changed that.  It is interesting to me today that the new Government has chosen not to have in place the formal trappings of a Ministry of Financial Services.”

Madame President,
So here we have a former Governor of the Central Bank who clearly understood the importance of that Ministry and its relevance questioning the Government’s decision to do away with it.

THE CONTAINER PORT
Madame President
When I was here last I made certain comments with regard to the movement of the container port and the fact that there is a perceived conflict of interest on the part of the Deputy Prime Minister sitting as Chair to a meeting where the movement of the container port was discussed.  I was challenged when I was here last to present the Minutes of that meeting.  I have the Minutes here with me and will present them if the other side so requires.  I would only say that I don’t know whether or not that will serve them well and maybe the Leader for Government business may wish to review these before they are laid before you.  The Deputy Prime Minister did not take issue with the fact that he chaired the meeting and I have here with me a copy of the August 9th, 2007 Business Section of the Tribune with the caption “Deputy PM denies Bay Street “Conflict” claim. In response to my assertion that he chaired a meeting discussing the movement of the container port to Arawak Cay and I quote: “There was no conflict of interest involved, and if there was I would have excused myself.”

Madame President
I have stated that it is my view that there is a clear conflict of interest when someone has an interest in one of the shipping companies and they sit discussing from a Governmental standpoint what the future of their shipping company will be – to me that is a clear conflict! If it looks like a duck…

Madame President
The reason why this is of such grave concern to me is that this revolves around an issue of serious national importance and that is the movement of the container port from downtown Nassau.  In November of last year, a report  that was  commissioned by the Government of The Bahamas and the private sector was presented to the Government. The cost of the report was $500,000. It was shared equally by the two parties. The report was presented by the Ecory’s Group in a meeting chaired by guess who? Yes the Deputy Prime Minister. The same Deputy Prime Minister who back in July of last year chaired a meeting where a great deal of the meeting revolved around the discussion of moving the port to Arawak Cay and not to the southwest of Nassau as was envisaged under the PLP Government.
Madame President
What is interesting is that from November 2007 to March 2008, some four months has passed, since this 156 page report was presented to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister of Works. Not one single word has been said about it to the public, not one single word.  But isn’t it interesting that today some eight months after that July meeting where the discussion centered around moving the port to Arawak Cay, that from what we read in the dailies, the Government plans to move the port to Arawak Cay.
Madame President
 If the FNM Government continues on this course to move the container port to Arawak Cay, it will be the biggest blunder they would have made to date.  And we all know they have made some big ones since coming to office.  Let me go on the record as saying I oppose the move of the port to Arawak Cay. Financially I think it is irresponsible, logistically it makes no sense and for the future development of our country and in particular Nassau it is a very prohibitive.

Madame President
How did the Government come to this decision?  What about the half million dollar report that was presented to the Deputy Prime Minister.  I  know for a fact because I have read the report that there is no plausible argument that can be used against proceeding with the consultants  recommendations.  The estimated cost is somewhere in the region of $225 million.  And, I have read in the daily papers and have been reliably advised that the cost to move the container port to Arawak Cay will to be in the region of $175 to $200 million and at the end of the day I have no doubt that it will cost the same as or more than that of the South West port.  And Arawak Cay can only be a short term solution. This means that at the end of the day, whether we like it or not, if any of us live to see another 15 to 20 years, the port will be relocated again and at that time to the southwest of Nassau.  So the question must be asked why is this Government pushing to move the port to Arawak Cay to the long term detriment of our economy.  Why is the FNM Government so gung-ho on heaping up containers at our cruise ship port of entry.  Why are they so single minded in their approach to Arawak Cay which will only further congest traffic on the West Bay street.
Madame President
Any number of Bahamians who travel on West Bat Street on a daily basis can tell you that imposing containers and container traffic in that area will be devastating. And the question must also be asked  what are the implications for the Deputy Prime Minister? As I said before, he should remove himself from this process immediately so that any decision taken by his Government will not be perceived as a clear conflict of interest by him. The Deputy Prime Minister should be removed from the process, he should not be included in any discussions and most definitely he should not attend any meetings in this regard.
It is wrong, Madame President, and I don’t care how he or those on the other side try to gloss it over, the Bahamian people know a conflict of interest when they see it. I have no doubt that the Prime Minister of the Commonwelth of the Bahamas the Rt. Honourable Hubert Alexander Ingraham knows a conflict when he sees it even if his Deputy does not. I will leave it at that for now.

Madame President
Let me go further and say that if the FNM continues on this course to move the container port to Arawak Cay, it will be the biggest blunder they would have made to date.  And we  all know they have made some big ones since coming to office.  Let me go on the record as saying I oppose the move of the port to Arawak Cay. Financially I think it is irresponsible, logistically it makes no sense, and for the future development of our country and in particular Nassau it is very prohibitive.
 

Madame President,
I have from time to time during my contributions inserted letters or statements to the Press not only to allow these persons whose interests we come here to represent, but also to make the point that, apart from all the back and forth in this Chamber, that there are real issues that the Bahamian people want addressed.  In closing therefore, I would like to read a letter to the editor on one of the dailies on the record which I accept as my own. The letter is written by Ortland H. Bodie Jr. and appeared in the Nassau Guardian on March 4th 2008.