The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Many Family Islands are being “economically disadvantaged” because of inefficient port and maritime infrastructure, the Arawak Cay port’s top executive believes.

Michael Maura, chief executive of BISX-listed Arawak Port Development Company (APD), said port layouts and size limited the types of vessels that could deliver cargo to these islands.

This, in turn, prevented shipping companies from achieving economies of scale, resulting in higher freight rates and goods/commodity costs in the Family Islands compared to Nassau or Grand Bahama.

“They’re economically disadvantaged,” Mr Maura told Tribune Business of many Family Islands. “The maritime infrastructure, the port infrastructure results in them being economically disadvantaged.”

The APD chief executive added that while the Bahamas was “so concerned” about its annual slippage in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business rankings, the focus from a competitiveness perspectibe was almost exclusively placed on New Providence and the Family Islands were ignored.

“We worry ourselves with the cost per hotel room at Atlantis and Baha Mar, but the Family Islands have the same concerns and they’re having to operate from a place where there’s inconsistent availability of water and sub-standard port infrastructure,” Mr Maura told Tribune Business.

“How are they expected to become economically independent? I was on the phone this morning to the Chamber of Commerce head in Long Island, and I wanted to cry over how tough it is in Long Island. It is tough.”

Mr Maura acknowledged that Family Islands faced “challenges” with freight rates and the cost of goods, plus the way cargo vessels interacted with the available port infrastructure.

He suggested that the reason some vessels were just 190 feet long, and had an eight-foot draft, stemmed from the fact that Family Island ports only had the depth, berthing space and ramps to accommodate small ships.

Mr Maura said this was “not the most cost effective way” to conduct Family Island commerce, and added: “Is that the right kind of infrastructure to support future prosperity and economic independence in the Family Islands?”

Earlier, addressing a press conference to preview this week’s Bahamas Business Outlook conference, Mr Maura emphasised the “need to consider the needs and perspectives” of Family Islands when it came to commercial shipping facilities.

APD has made no secret of its willingness to become involved in port development, management and operations in the Family Islands, possibly in a public-private partnership (PPP) with the Government.

Mr Maura confirmed he had also spoken with Chamber of Commerce heads in Exuma and Eleuthera as a first step towards launching this initiative, in a bid to find out what local private sectors and communities needed in terms of port infrastructure.

“At the end of the day, if we were to really rank some of the Family Islands, we would have some islands at the top and some at the bottom,” he said. “Which islands need the help now, and does that translate into economic prosperity and development, or are we investing in something that can? We have to go through that exercise.”

Mr Maura suggested that the Government-private sector PPP that ultimately led to APD’s creation, and that of the Nassau Container Port, was a model that could be emulated in the Family Islands for their benefit.

“No one is expecting the Government to go it alone,” the APD chief said. “I expect it to embrace the private sector going forward.”

He recalled how the Arawak Cay port’s arrival was set in motion in 2006 with the EDAW plan, which showed that for New Providence’s economy and GDP to improve “something had to happen to downtown”.

With the shipping companies taking up 20 acres of prime Nassau harbourfront, and “competing with retail and tourism businesses”, downtown Bay Street did “not have the right mix”.

Mr Maura said: “When you look at the Nassau Container Port, the Government looked at commercial shipping and specifically port operations, and said: ‘Do these port operations lend themselves to the future growth and development of New Providence?’ The answer was ‘no’; something had to change.”