12th February 2009
Mr. Oswald Ingraham, Members and supporters of the PLP here in Governor’s Harbour and the South Eleuthera District. It is a real pleasure and honour to be here this evening. I have been promising to make a visit here for some time. And this visit almost got cancelled last night because of some pressing matters in Nassau but I am quite glad to be here, in a place where I feel at home, and in a setting that is very familiar to me.
I first want to thank Mr. Ingraham for his kind invitation to come here. I want to congratulate him again for that magnificent victory in the face of a national swing against the PLP in 2007. The FNM thought that Mr. Ingraham was a push over, but what they got was a push back. Their defeated candidate is now relegated to sniping at Oswald Ingraham’s heels and I am told seeking to make it difficult for people in this constituency who did not vote for the FNM in the last election. And if he denies that, it is certainly true and I can say without fear of contradiction that the policies of the FNM government which he supports has ruined the economy of our country, and caused any people to slip back into poverty, hurting the people of Eleuthera. This was certainly not the state of things when we left office some 18 months ago.
I have said it many times and I say it again tonight.
The Bahamian people are entitled to adopt the song “You Get Swing” and
we are entitled to sing “Look what you could get when you tired of what
you gat.”
These are quite interesting times. The times present
some unique challenges. I know that all of you know that when we
left office, there was an economy on the upward way, new heights it was
gaining every day. In a short year and a half, that has all been
reversed. They try to blame it on the international developments.
While that has made the situation worse, the proof is irrefutable that
Hubert Ingraham’s reckless policies of stop review and cancel are in the
main accountable for where we now find ourselves.
The same recklessness that he has brought to economic policy, he has brought to governance.
The latest example of this was just last night when in the face of clear evidence that what the FNM proposes to do with the length of service of the Commissioner of Police and the Deputy Commissioner of Police is unconstitutional, Hubert Ingraham proceeded any way. It is typical of the bull in the china shop mentality.
At the end of my statement, I would be happy to talk some more about that. We abstained last night. For those who may not be familiar with the mechanics of abstention, it requires the Members of Parliament when the vote is called for, pulling their chairs back from the table. We did that, all of us who were present for the vote. We were united on this and without dissent.
The reason that we did so was because we did not want to provide any support for an unconstitutional measure. In the committee stage of the Bill, we offered an amendment to delete the unconstitutional provision which would limit the terms of a Commissioner of Police and Deputy Commissioner to two five-year terms. The government voted against the amendment. In the circumstances, we could not support an unconstitutional measure, nor could we give any legal comfort to the government that this had the support of two thirds of the majority which could possibly lay the basis for an attempt to amend the constitution.
We support all other parts of the bill. The Bill, but for that unconstitutional provision, is in fact our bill. What is amazing is how the FNM when it is losing an argument tries to get nasty and into the mud pit. Yesterday, they were denigrating our legal scholarship, throwing jeers about what was done in previous years by a PLP administration, of which most of the present members were not a part. There was one particularly nasty assault done by the Member of Parliament for Golden Isle. It was then that the Bahamian public realized that the FNM was losing the argument. The first refuge of a scoundrel is to get into the mud pit.
Then the FNM tried to make it seem that the PLP is somehow against the Police Force. They then try to twist and rewrite history. We defended our record last night of approving the largest promotion ever in the history of the Force. It was not done for votes. In fact, the promotion results were prohibited from being announced prior to the election. Compare this to 1997, when on the day of the police vote, the FNM administration headed by Hubert Ingraham received a $1500 lump sum payment to their salaries. The night before at a public rally Hubert Ingraham said to the police that when they went to the polls the next day: “Remember the money! Remember the money!”
It must be clear then that we support the police force.
But I want to say to you that while the police force is
important, there is no more important public policy issue in this country
at the moment than our economy. Every time, I speak on the subject
and hear of the rant and raves of Hubert Ingraham, I have only one response:
“It’s the economy stupid!” I think that it is a chant that we should adopt.
Thousands of people have been laid off in Nassau.
The tourism sector is in free fall, with a government impotent to do anything
about it. In my constituency of Fox Hill, there is a huge demand
for jobs from people who have nothing o do. They send out resumes.
They apply for job after job and nothing. Yet when we in the PLP
talk about people, back comes the FNM talking facts and figures.
When we talk about people, the FNM talks about land and buildings.
It’s the economy stupid.
Where does this all leave us? It is important for us to understand that the PLP’s job is to get back to government. I certainly believe that this is possible.
You may know that in January of this year, I launched what I call an agenda for change and invited the young PLPs to buy into the vision of making The Bahamas a developed country by the year 2020. I said that this goal of the party should be infused with the themes of social justice and economic empowerment.
When I speak of social justice, I say that the social mobility that saw men and women of modest means rise to great wealth and influence within one generation in our country should continue and be protected.
When I speak of economic empowerment, it is to provide the incentives for the people of the country to own a stake in the country.
The other points on the agenda 2020 are as follows:
Eleuthera should be especially interested in food security and small business development. For this, there must be a special development fund to ensure that this happens, buttressed by Government support with contracts and with expertise. I would be interested in your ideas.
Now there is some level of discomfort amongst some PLPs about the changes that are going on in the PLP. No fight for power, no transition is entirely seamless or without problems. Change is untidy. It is not like the movies, with neat clean lines and happy endings. Change is good for an organization however. When it refuses to change, it dies. This is the stark message which faces us a party that we must adapt or die. We cannot think that the government will fall into our laps. The bible reminds us night comes when no man can work so we must work while it is still day.
That work means retooling the PLP to make it a fit and proper organization to lead us to Agenda 2020.
You will hear many voices.
Some seem to be confused by this but should not be. My own view is let a thousand voices contend. However, it is also clear that there are only some people who are official voices for the party. What has been happening is that any Tom, Dick or Harry can present themselves to the press in our country, pin the label leader of the PLP on themselves and suddenly they are spokesmen for the PLP.
The people who speak for the PLP are its party Officers and its Members of Parliament. The Members of Parliament including senators all have shadow responsibilities. The shadow Cabinet is the policy making equivalent to the Cabinet and it functions like the Cabinet. The shadow ministers speak within the purview of their portfolios on matters of policy. They need to check with no one on this so long as they are not making policies but responding within the decided policy frameworks. There is a little bit of flexibility in that a shadow minister will often distinguish his position by saying that it is his personal view. That is not often a flexibility that Ministers have. But as with all things, unless faced with the exigencies of time it is always better to consult with colleagues. The two positions of speaking extemporaneously and issuing statement after consultation are not mutually exclusive.
Well that’s my bit this evening. Once again, I thank your representative for their kind invitation.