The Tribune

EDITOR, The Tribune.

In 1903 Pierre Dupuch’s grandfather, Leon Dupuch, decided to risk his treasure, his reputation and the ire of the British colonial masters and set up a newspaper that has now published continuously for the past 113 years.

The grand-père Dupuch set an extremely high bar for himself when he incorporated as his paper’s motto the lofty goal: “Being bound to swear to the dogmas of no master”. With that The Tribune decreed that it will never bend a knee to anyone. The heirs and successors have jealously guarded that guiding principle ever since.

Leon Dupuch started the paper but it was Pierre’s dad, fearless human rights campaigner the late Sir Etienne Dupuch who built it into an internationally respected journalistic institution. Sir Etienne’s unshakeable faith in the Bahamian people was as strong as the metaphorical coat of armor he wore to deflect what was heavy criticism from the colonial establishment, then from the Bay Street Boys, then the UBP, and ultimately from the PLP.

Pierre took us on a nostalgic stroll down a Dupuch family memory lane by reciting what must have been a delightful time growing up with the great man, Sir Etienne. Pity Pierre seems to have conveniently forgotten much of what his journalistic warrior father surely would have instilled in him about not shooting the messenger.

It was Sir Etienne’s creed that neither he nor his newspaper should ever become the story. He insisted that The Tribune report the news without fear or favour. There were times, of course, when Sir Etienne’s principles just could not be bought or silenced and he had to become the story – one such instance being his fierce and successful advocacy to end racial discrimination in our country.

For that we posthumously owe Sir Etienne our abiding respect and gratitude. Indeed Pierre’s reporting that his father’s contributions are not being widely taught in schools is both sad and appalling. No compendium of the history of the Bahamas would be complete if the name Dupuch is excluded.

Pierre’s siblings know well that Sir Etienne would never allow himself to be sidetracked over the by-line on a story or letter to the editor. Discrediting the messenger was a clever ruse used by the likes of the late Sir Lynden Pindling to distract voters from the negative essence of a news story and in so doing cause the focus to shift away from the meat and potatoes of what the writer had to say.

Long before Donald Trump gave unsavory monikers to his political foes, Sir Lynden was vilifying the likes of famed cricketer turned Fleet Street writer Ivan Johnson (now of The Punch but previously of The Tribune) in an attempt to discredit Ivan’s biting journalism and unflattering stories on his government. Sir Lynden wanted us to not believe the story simply because Ivan wrote it. Never mind its veracity.

Pierre seems to be following that same old PLP playbook. This time he has it in for this writer. And like his friend and mine Tennyson Wells, he has given me a presumed identity. I am not who he may think I am.

Pierre should stop trying to make me out to be who his fertile imagination wants me to be. No one has sent me. I see a Bahamian who has decided to get involved staring back at me whenever I look in the mirror. Like Sir Etienne, I carry membership cards for no political party. I write of the principles in which I believe and espouse the philosophies that I think can make this country better. Participatory democracy and two-way citizenship are examples of time-tested doctrines. Vetting those who serve or seek to serve in government is a sound journalistic principle.

The late US President John F Kennedy’s exultation to “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”, excited my imagination many years ago and that candle still burns.

If Pierre and Tennyson can’t stand the political heat then they should stay out of the public kitchen. I am an observer of governmental behavioUr and political activity. I invite all and sundry to disagree with my analyses. Feel free to join this very public debate. But bring facts not fairytales. Come with ideas not idioms. Policy suggestions not propaganda.

Democracy demands that we have robust political parties – one to govern and the other to keep the fire toasting the feet of those in power. Last month’s FNM caucus implosion proves that there is a crisis of leadership in the party. Pierre and Tennyson believe that because Dr. Hubert Minnis was elected by the FNM delegates that he should remain in his position untested and unchallenged while the party’s electoral prospects slip even further from its grasp.

Leaders are not perfect. That is why democracy allows us to remove bad leaders. Political party byelaws permit challenges to the leader anytime he is not up to the task. In fact, the council of the FNM has a solemn responsibility to ensure that the party is battle ready for the next election. That means the leader commands the respect, grudging or otherwise, of the followers.

I happen to believe that Dr. Minnis is the wrong man to take on Perry Christie and the PLP. He is apparently a likeable guy, so likeable in fact that all sorts of people want to have a stew fish with him. I do not think Dr. Minnis has the capacity to lead a cabinet in shaping the kind of answers to this country’s challenges.

Pierre begs to differ with me. His argument is no further strengthened because he signs his name when communicating with the Editor, any more than my argument is diminished by my election not so to do.

The tiny number of delegates who can vote for the FNM leader pale into trivial insignificance when stacked up against the general population that will elect the next government. If delegates keep their heads in the sand and think only of what they want then the Bahamian people will keep the FNM out of power for another five years. Five more years for Perry Christie to struggle in reverse gear instead of driving us forward.

By forcing the FNM into critical self-analysis the party can roar back into relevance and in so doing deepen our democracy.

Come on Pierre. This is the kind of debate your forefathers would have relished. From what I am told Sir Etienne never paid short shrift to anyone with a serious argument to make. What’s your excuse Pierre? Tennyson got your tongue?

THE GRADUATE

Nassau,

June 28, 2016.