The Tribune

By LARRY SMITH

AFTER thanking Perry Christie, the Progressive Liberal Party and his erstwhile constituents in Fort Charlotte for their support, Alfred Sears attempted to define “the way forward” for his party and the country.

In his first post-election commentary last week, Mr Sears claimed it is the FNM, rather than the PLP, which today seeks to implement a “progressive and liberal political and social agenda”.

He said many of the reforms promised in the FNM’s recent Throne Speech had been proposed before by the PLP, as well as by Mr Sears himself in his recent bid to replace Mr Christie as PLP leader.

Mr Sears called on the party to “rebuild and rebrand” itself, arguing that it had to provide a real vision for the future rather than just act as a forceful opposition.

He said the party had to commit itself to honest governance, sustainable development, equal opportunity, and protection of our civil rights and freedoms.

“Over the past 44 years, the perception of the PLP has shifted to a party more aligned with foreign interests over Bahamians, a lack of national vision, weak leadership, corruption and scandals,” Mr Sears said.

But the problem is that the party remains under the control of a geriatric mafia - men who were large and in charge from the time I started my first job in the early 1970s. They continue to pull the strings, despite being badly out of touch with modern realities.

Shortly before the May 10 general election, former Deputy Prime Minister Philip Davis and retired Pindling Cabinet minister George Smith both glibly predicted a PLP win.

“I see no reason why we shouldn’t take 30 seats,” Mr Davis said smugly. And according to Mr Smith, although the vote might be closer, “the PLP will emerge victorious.”

These forecasts required us to accept that the PLP had not lost any significant support over its disastrous five-year term—a stretch by any measure.

In the end, the PLP won barely 37 per cent of the vote and held onto just four seats in Parliament - the worst electoral result in modern Bahamian history.

And that was in the face of a credible third party threat, combined with months of destructive infighting among FNMs.

The election result was significant for the PLP, if somewhat less so for the FNM. It would indicate to most observers that the party should turn to (relatively) fresh leaders like Alfred Sears.

But since May 10, the usual suspects (like Fred Mitchell and Bradley Roberts) have weighed in with the usual angry and unrepentant rhetoric - completely overlooking the slap down from voters.

And the old guard PLP fixer Mr Davis has taken over as both party leader and leader in the House. If he is not dislodged at a forthcoming convention (an unlikely event), it will mean the PLP won’t get the overhaul it needs to regain the electorate’s trust.

That does not count the party out, however. It will remain a large and powerful organisation, and its influence will recover over time. Whether the party learns from its mistakes, retires the geriatrics, and creates a new internal culture is the big question.

Meanwhile, the Democratic National Alliance is conducting its own self-examination following utter failure at the polls. Party Leader Bran McCartney has given no indication so far of falling on his sword, but it is hard to believe that financial backers will want to continue the third party project—especially since both Hubert Ingraham and Perry Christie have now left the scene for good.

The other big question is whether Dr Minnis and his new Cabinet will be able to actually follow through on the raft of reforms they have promised in order to transform our governance and rescue public finances.

We have all heard before the preening rhetoric that follows political victories. It is the same every five years. But once tempers settle down, hard decisions have to be made in order to achieve progress. This can affect various interests and present major obstacles in terms of public sector funding and capacity.

The We March activist movement was a novel factor in the last election. And there are high hopes that new leaders like Ranard Henfield will hold the new government’s feet to the fire.

As Mr Henfield said right after the election: “Now that we’ve eliminated the PLP, who laughed at our list of issues when they were the government, We March will issue an updated list to Dr Hubert Minnis. Our role is to be a pressure group - and the opposition if the four PLPs can’t be effective.”

He later accepted a Senate post from Prime Minister Minnis on the justification that Dr Minnis had promised far-reaching reforms.

These promises include auditing government departments, empowering civil society, expanding local government, setting term limits, establishing an ombudsman, and addressing campaign finance and official corruption, among other things.

Dr Minnis is more of a technocrat than a politician. And if even some of these promises are met, he will have moved the country forward for the first time in decades. Bahamians may even regain some optimism and hope for the future.

Tit for Tat - At our Expense

The recent political drama over the government’s fiscal deficit is an almost exact replay of what happened when the PLP replaced the FNM five years ago.

During his presentation of the 2012-2013 budget, then Prime Minister Perry Christie said the former Ingraham government’s policies had left the country in a “dire” fiscal position with the deficit and debt levels much worse than anticipated.

In fact, he projected a $504m deficit for 2011-2012, and a $550m deficit for the 2012-2013 fiscal year.

“It has become clear to us that the previous administration has severely constrained our room to manoeuvre,” Mr Christie said back then.

“We have been left with sizable, ongoing commitments and a legacy of contracts entered into in the final days of the former administration.”

Michael Halkitis, former minister of state for finance, castigated the Ingraham administration for “reckless” spending, particularly during the last months of its term.

These comments are almost identical to the criticisms made by current Finance Minister K Peter Turnquest in his budget address to Parliament last week.

Referring to five years of mismanagement and poor governance by the previous administration, Mr Turnquest said: “(The) high level of outstanding payables is directly responsible for the government seeking emergency funding (of $400 million) to meet the obligations of the 2016-2017 budget.

“The fiscal situation is far bleaker than we could have ever imagined. Our predecessors have left us with a cupboard that is bare.”

It seems that our imaginations are so elastic that they expand every five years to incorporate ever more public spending and debt.

The main difference this time around is that we are not dealing with another Ingraham administration. The new Minnis government is mostly a fresh slate.

It will be interesting to see if that translates into the actual application of the fiscal responsibility, anti-corruption and accountability policies that are promised.

• What do you think? Send comments to lsmith@tribunemedia.net or visit www.bahamapundit.com.