Share Global View Today News!

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

End of 2014 wrap up! What happened this year?

Well, as we end the year 2014, the obligatory wrap up of this year's events must be conducted.

First of all, I thank everyone for reading my submissions and sending me feedback. I thank all of you, from the bottom of my heart. It's not often the average citizen, like myself, gets a chance to communicate his thoughts, ideas and feelings with a broader audience, regardless if people care about my topic or not. But, I truly do appreciate it and I thank you for being a part.

Well, this 2014 has been a relatively mundane year. Perhaps it's me that's getting older, and the regular things that used to titillate and excite me just doesn't anymore? But, in all honesty, this year seems like a continuation of the regular. Sad, I know.

The first thing that comes to mind is the upheaval in the Ukraine and the standoff between that country and their former colonizer, Russia when under the former communist bloc, the USSR pre-1991.

The upheaval was bloody, unnecessary and very much avoidable. The situation was also embarrassing for the United States, and particularly to president Barack Obama leading NATO during the crisis.

President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, flipped the entire Western world the bird and said that as a result of this crisis, he will annex Crimea- a territory within the Ukrainian border- and no one would be able to do a blessed thing about it.
Russian President, Vladimir Putin.

For those thinking that president Putin was "punking out" president Obama, forgot that Putin did something more egregious back in 2008 to former US president GW. Bush. Not only did Bush induce a war in the sovereign state of Georgia, but simply took massive tracts of land on the North Eastern border of Georgia. That time his intentions were more clear and decisive than in the case of Crimea, because it was a direct response to US defence systems being placed in Georgia as installations of first response in the event Russia and America were to ever go to war.

Another thing that has happened, and still happening, is the revelation and current scandal that comedian Bill Cosby is embroiled in as it pertains to his years and years of alleged rapes of Hollywood starlets.

Over 20 women have come forward and stated that Bill Cosby raped them. What was so startling and shocking about this entire affair is the length and time some of these rapes took place. Some women claim to have been assaulted as far back as the late 1970's.

Bill Cosby, loving the pudding pops.
Further concerning about his entire affair is that almost all of the women have the same story: They were invited to Cosby's home, given drink and in some instances narcotics, drugged to sleep and then woke up and found themselves in compromising positions, with a taxi-cab waiting on them outside and told to get out.

Also, and it seems to feed the stereotype of the ravenous, sex-starved black man, who is only hungry for the poor and defenceless white woman, most of Cosby's accusers are Caucasian.

Whatever ends up as a result of all of this, it appears as if Bill Cosby is not "Dr. Cliff Huxtable", the beloved character and father figure he portrayed on his hit television show of the 1980's. We wish him all the best during his time of trial.

Another major event, albeit very subtle, was the current position of the Catholic Pope Francis. He has taken some very interesting positions that were once anti-religious and anti-Catholic: He has become more and more vocal in his warmth and understanding towards homosexuals and their lifestyle. Something that has angered Bishops within his won ranks, and also provided tremendous criticisms world wide, both pro-gay and anti-gay.
Catholic Pope Francis
Whatever the end game Pope Francis has in mind, his pronouncements are taken very, very seriously. He has a following worldwide and influences not just Catholics and Christians, but people that look to him as a guiding light of morality and voice of reason.

Something also very, very important happened this year, and globally dangerous issue for us as peace loving citizens, and for my case, as a follower of Christ, and that is the emergence of the radical Islamic terrorist group, ISIS.

This group of radicalized Islamic terrorist are responsible for the murder of hundreds of Christians and non-Muslims within the Middle East. They have displaced thousands of people inside Iraq and Syria, and sent them on the road to no-man's land and to their slow death of starvation and elements.

Who or whatever started this group is unimportant at this time. I condemn their actions, and so too should you. I condemn their radical form of Islam. And anyone that stands with them are too condemned and should be rooted out, eradicated.

I say that because, oddly enough, there were not only American citizen that went to fight with ISIS, but there were European men and women in addition to, and most puzzling, Caribbean nationals that were reported to have joined ISIS in their Jihad. This puts the peace and conscience of Caribbean people on edge, as we do not have the security or response measures to combat a major terrorist attack on our soil.

Baroness, Patricia Scotland
of Asthal
Further with regard to the Caribbean, there were a host of issues that resonated with me region-wide. The kerfluffle with the Dominican appointee to head the Commonwealth Secretariat, Baroness Patricia Scotland of Asthal, sparked major controversy. An appointee that was a British parliamentarian, which was the primary reason persons around the Caribbean cried foul. Foul because how can you have a British parliamentarian, sit on meetings for the Caribbean nations and other former colonized nations, and at worst be the head of such a grouping with Britain, where her current allegiance lies, as the former colonizer of all of the English speaking Caribbean- the predominant Caribbean nations.

Folks in these meetings, meetings that are very important because they are few and far between, for obvious reasons, like and need to talk shop. Talking shop means issues sensitive to our former colonizers. Not that anything damaging would be discussed, but some things we just don't want the British government to know.

Speaking of politicians, former premier of the Turks and Caicos, Michael Misick, was given bail for his corruption charges and is walking around to many a warm reception by his people in the TCI. For whatever that's worth. We wish him all the best.

Also, and this takes me back to my opening salvo that 2014 seems to be a year filled of more of the same, the current upheaval in Haiti. The prime minister, Laurent Lamothe, has been forced to resign amidst allegations of corruption that spurred these protests.

Former Haitian Prime Minister
Laurent Lamothe
Several other ministers have resigned with him. This has put the spotlight back on president Martelly, as he is now the only other person Haitians can blame because things aren't going right. To me, he was doing a fairly decent job as president of Haiti, barring his lack of formal skills and training.

Whatever has Haiti bound by this spirit of upheaval and chaos, I pray that one day, and one day soon, it all will be solved. For their sakes. 

With that, let's look to the new year, 2015 with vigour, new resolve and committed spirit to do better.

I wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year. Thank you for reading, God bless you all and I wish to see you again soon.

Saturday, December 13, 2014

The World Trade Organisation and The Bahamas!

The Minister responsible for Financial Services and Trade, The Honourable Ryan Pinder, resigned his post as Minister to take up a private post. This leaves his Ministry without a Minister. In addition, just previously to his resignation, the Director of his Ministry, was selected to head up the secretariat charged with producing a national development plan for The Bahamas. Without a doubt, international trade and integration for The Bahamas has been put under a very serious test: With or without the understanding that the ministry of finance has dual carriage for trade matters.

Over the last 15 years The Bahamas has been making greater steps towards becoming a member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). This is an important step in the development for any country that wishes to become a member of this grouping. So far, the Bahamas is among a particularly awkward group of countries that are currently not members: Iran and Iraq are some other notable countries, with Russia officially joining in 2012.

Just for background information, the WTO has been around since the end of the Second World War. It was formerly called the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), before the conclusion of the 1996 Uruguay Round of world trade talks which then established a universal name for the grouping and tighter rules on goods and services. Before 1996 it was promoted as a post-war economic integration mechanism for European and North American countries and since then, it has been promoted even more so, but with more countries included along with their contentions and complexities.

The WTO is currently in the middle of a seemingly endless round of trade talks, which started in Doha Qatar in 2002. Having a round of talks in the Middle East, post 9-11 attacks and the US Middle Eastern invasion, was supposed to be the olive branch extended to the Middle Eastern world by Western powers (well, let's just say by the USA) as a way to show them "peace through trade”. Sort of like the US's Iraq invasion strategy of bombs and bread, with trade added to it.

More importantly, however, the idea that the WTO is a complex organisation is true to a great extent. Its rules based arrangements are designed purposefully to be intrusive on sovereign authority and sovereign economic policy making.

This international rules based mechanism, makes the interconnection and coordination of multi-national protocols and standards, based on traditions and customs as well as sovereign protection on industries deemed as sacred, difficult, when this system has to cater to the needs, the flexibilities and sometimes inflexibility of its members.

The position the Bahamas finds itself in at this stage by not being a member, can be good, or bad, depending on the premium placed on the economic position of the Bahamas and what Bahamians feel as their best interests for the future.

For one, not being a member makes you a pariah. Even though the Bahamas is a member of a lot of other international bodies and agreements and has a good political and economic track record, not being a member of this standard bearing group looks a little dubious. Along with being a pariah, doing business with international firms that expect a transparent system for them to invest, becomes problematic if national standards aren't, at least, at baseline international standards and compliance benchmarks.

The second thing is with regard to tax reform and the need for The Bahamas for taxation reform. Tax reform has never just been a trivial matter in any country, let alone for a country that has no other forms of taxation other than from import tariffs and public service charges and some minor, real property taxes- with the latter not taken very seriously. But, the matter of proper taxation is critical to being successful at world trade level and at the same time, protecting domestic interests.

One thing is clear with WTO economic principles: Reducing tariffs on import competing products is at the essential core of the WTO. In fact, two foremost policies are: 1. The non-Discrimination of goods and services and 2. The reciprocity of that trade openness, between countries, either by direct tariff cuts or through modality approach- that being, phased in over a period of time.

A country, like The Bahamas, which is heavily dependent on tariffs/customs duties for government revenue, once the phasing in of WTO standards and honouring commitments to other members on reducing customs duties on certain items, indicates very bluntly that the Bahamas will have to find other sources of revenue, as it is poised to implement Value Added Tax by January 1st, 2015.

Everything from tax reform, to increasing the transparency in public and private investments, to even proper record keeping, speaks to a larger issue of broader public sector reform and also to the cultural way we tend to do business. Not only broader private and public sector reform, but having the capacity to commit to contracts and agreements over the time period in which you said you were going to do exactly that.

Cutting this point short: The entire way we do business has to change. A colleague of mine from Trinidad, who worked in the Bahamas for a short time stated to a group he was presenting to; "Do you remember when your mother used to bake that sweet bread every Sunday? (YEA!) And the neighbour used to fix her door or cabinets for her in exchange for that baked bread? (YEA!) Well, those days are long gone! (OOOOOOHHHH!!!)"

The changes needed in the way we do business do not have to be drastic and done overnight. It can be done bit by bit to suit our needs, or, actually- “GASP”- structurally planned! The issue of whether or not what change comes first; to what extent should certain institutions- whether they are public or private- should change; and how to sensitively change what we know needs to change without public insurrection, is where the discussion on WTO accession should be. But it isn't.

The reason why the discussion isn't where it ought to be is because the broader public, on average, tend to become frustrated when we speak about large macro-economic and macro-financial jargon and concepts. It's like, for example, an accountant trying to understand quantum physics. They would be no better off than a person who has the reading capability of a second year college student- or perhaps even a first year college student.

The other reason why the discussion isn't where it ought to be- and that being on the institutional and the economic way of how we do business- is because no one has been able to break down the large concepts and ideas, into bite sized nuggets for the citizens to digest.

For the most part in The Bahamas, the public discussion comes in after the fact. In fact, not only does public discussion come in after the fact, it sometimes isn’t very fruitful to the issue at all. The reason being that the persons explaining the issues, become frustrated at times at the lack of, seemingly, intellectual depth by the broader public on the matter (like the average Joe understands stochastic measurements and the difference between the HO model and the Laffer curve).

In addition, the broader public become angry at the persons making these decisions and making them without their input and apparently always in secret- a very open secret I may add. So, the cycle of confusion and obfuscation continues.

All of this uncovers another problem (well, not really another problem uncovered, because anyone who has ever done anything in The Bahamas understands this by now), and that is the lack of information that is readily available for the general public to digest. Not just transparency in the public sector, or private sector for that matter, but, the transparently coherent of initiatives for the broader public.

My sentiment is that: You can't blow my mind if I don't understand what it is you are blowing my mind with. This goes a very long way in educating the public on the importance, for them, of what trade agreements and in particular, what the WTO means.

The issue of knowing what to expect is critical to putting in place the safety mechanisms in order to protect the state revenue and the public interest with regard to consumer protection, commercial protectionism and cultural influx.

What should happen with labour and unions? What should happen with tax reform and state revenue? What would happen when legal immigration and immigration become larger problems? What would happen to sovereign rights? What should happen to infant industries? What should happen to the inflow of capital becomes too much or too little? What should happen to import competing companies? What should happen with regard to exports and export support? What should happen to the lives that depend on the decisions made upon all of these?

There's no cookie cutter solution for these problems. This WTO accession approach simply needs a touch of policy flexibility, imagination and creativity, put into realistic institutions that don't harm the domestic economy or be damaging to global competitors and the clout they carry.

The proper discussions need to take place. Not discussions on what people have done after the fact. But, what should we do and why it affects you. There is no easier other way!

Saturday, December 6, 2014

The BNCC: The courage of common sense!

The Bahamas National Citizens Coalition (BNCC)  published in one of the local dailies a 25 year development plan for The Bahamas. This plan was published, almost simultaneously, with the national development plan launched by the government of The Bahamas a few weeks back.

As we discussed at length in a previous article, "A National Development Plan: What should be expected?", we tried to make the case of the importance of long term planning for The Bahamas, and highlighted some of the merits, challenges the planning committee may face in addition to addressing some of the bottlenecks that may occur. We wish to afford the BNCC the same level of respect that their courage to publish their views on planning deserves.

Through speaking to one of the progenitors of the BNCC's plan, they have assured me that a fair amount of research went into their statement and that one can conclude that it was not prepared in a peloton.

A statement of intentions is more in line with what was published, to be quite frank. One can't really fathom how lengthy the back notes, white papers, green papers, policy notes, analysis and impact assessments went in to their published product. But we should take the team at their word that work was done.

Without rehashing what was written earlier with regard to the plan launched by the government of The Bahamas, I wish to give a little more context into the thinking behind the BNCC in an attempt to grasp the spirit of what was produced and why it seemed so important to bring it to the public at this particular point and time.

The tenor of the BNCC's plan was harmonized around one particular theme: The Stafford Sands Economic model of Tourism (in that of the Promotion of Tourism Act,. 1965) and Financial Services (in the Bank and Trust Regulations Act., 1964), and the schemes born out of it that has retarded growth in the BNCC's estimation. 

I would like to add that the reliance on the Holy Grail of Economic models in The Bahamas, in that of the Sir Stafford Sands model, has in fact served it's usefulness, and perhaps is retarding growth if more than a healthy share of people fail to see any way past it.

There was an interesting report given at the Bahamas Economic Outlook, 2011 by Dr. Olivia Saunders from the College of the Bahamas. At this forum, she had challenged the understanding of the Sir Stafford Sands model for economic development in the Bahamas.

She had asserted that it really should not be credited to him to any great extent. She further claims that the Sir Stafford Sands model, is based solely on economic activity that was already present in the Bahamas from the 19th century. I could not have agreed more. In fact, I think the insipid repetition of the "model" is not only mystifying, but also borders on cult-like rabidity, which lends itself to mental images of faithful and loyal clansmen, dressed in their dark hooded robes gather in their covens surrounded by a pentagram neatly drawn in white chalk, kneeling in front of an altar with a sacrificial Potcake atop, with a menagerie of warmly lit blue candles smattered about while the chants of the name of Sir Stafford Sands with selected quotes from speeches echoing through the room, interrupted only by short outbursts of orgasmic like screams of glory, while pictures of Sir Stafford flicker in the dim mist.

Just to add some clarity on what the Sir Stafford Sands model is; it is a model for economic development of the Bahamas, using the pillars of financial services and tourism as the primary base for economic activity.

Without fear of sounding as if I am bashing the efforts of a deceased former cabinet minister, the ballyhoo over the "economic model" of Sir Sands is overplayed to a great extent. The brilliance of Sir Sands relied not in some grand mental faculty that was overlooked by mere mortals, but in fact the genius of it rested in basic common sense.

Tourists were coming to The Bahamas from the 1700's. In fact, The Bahamas, as were colonies like Jamaica, Barbados and the Caymans and Bermuda, were all vacation hideaways for the rich and the famous in Britain that extended to wealthy American and Canadian elites.

We had what every other Caribbean country had- sun, sand and sea with a more than amenable government structure that was kind to European visitors and controlled the masses as if they were cattle.

We also inherited our financial services model from the British. In fact, almost, if not all of the former and current British colonies have large offshore banking sectors. This was not something Sir Sands created, but facilitated because it was happening already.

The Banking Act. of 65' was repealed in 2000 due to OECD anti-money laundering strictures and replaced with another, which directly means that at least half of the Sands model was either washed or neutered; and the Tourism Act., 64' had minor changes to include taxation provisions in 1970, etc, etc. but too has been rendered antiquated and under constant threat from crime, other rival destinations in the region and the threat of the opening up of Cuba.

All of this indicates that the obsession with a Sir Stafford Sands model that never really was, is now proving injurious to the growth and development of The Bahamas as it chokes out anyone and any thing that merely mentions ideas challenging its genesis, usefulness then and now and practicality on any level.

This makes calls for things to be new, like the BNCC has provided for us, a breath of fresh air, even though some of the ideas, concepts and features should be fleshed out in detail.

For example, we all can agree that a Sovereign Wealth Fund for The Bahamas is perfect common sense. There is no empirical reason why we can't and shouldn't have one, with the capitalization of such an institution taken into consideration.

More importantly, the opening up of our natural resources to Bahamian, which shifts away from the current practice of open secrets on it's viability, the persons currently engaged in mining our natural resources and seeking to mine our natural assets, also makes perfect common sense.

It has been noted that Caribbean countries that use their natural resources for their benefit can and in fact are able to control economic cycle dynamics for the better, and hence control the growth of their respective economies.

Some of the other portions of the BNCC's statement are also ideals we should strive for and finds ways and means to doing so: From the elimination of the pre-requisite of grossly unneeded concessions for foreign direct investment; public service transformation to one that is more accountable and efficient; and the goal of creating 1,500 new millionaires over the first five years.

A lot of the BNCC's plan hinges on the exploitation of natural resources as a key pillar of economic development, but a lot of it hinges on the participation and the willingness for citizens to see the fundamental core of some of our problems and seek new and meaningful ways of correcting them.

While the BNCC's statement is not clear on the "how much", the "where do we start" and "the mechanics of getting all of this done", but common sense is what many of their proposals are, even before we begin to discuss the realistic mechanics of some of their proposals. 

Saturday, November 29, 2014

The wild world of Consultancy.

Ever worked for an organisation, where consultants walk in and out like a revolving door? As one of those persons that had the door greet me and hit me on the way out, you tend to smile at the nature of the work.

As a management consultant, I have been both whipping boy and saviour to both the same and different organizations. But in all times I left a place better than where I met it, or at least I'd like to think so!

Bahamians tend to rag on "Consultants", in particular Bahamian consultants that align themselves with political parties. Bahamians typically see them as cronies, hustlers, gravy train riders and just all out vermin. We often refer to them as the special group of "friends, family and lovers!".

As someone on the hustle myself, you tend to take the ribs, jibes and abuse with a grain of salt. Not because I'm either of the friend, family or lover persuasion. But because you have to take that burden into a game where it has been sullied and made mockery by people with legitimate reasons to do so.

Plus, when you factor in how really insulting and derogatory that particular friend, family and lover statement means, particularly when you see the same old "consultants" awarded numerous government contracts, from any standpoint (because it does not take a Nobel Laureate to appreciate if something is useful, working or not), one really has to be relaxed and calm amidst the regular jostling for prominence in this very broad field of consultancy in The Bahamas.
But, it does raise a particular concern about: What exactly does a consultant do? Better yet, what are consultants supposed to be doing?

In short: We can only do what you want us to do. We can't undo anything unless instructed to do so either. And in your organization, we are only bound by the rules of engagement you set for us.

Especially contractually obligated agreements, most consultants in the field for more than 5 years tend to appreciate sticking with the original agreement unless otherwise formally changed and understood by both parties. This stems the flow of corruption, theft, abuse, malfeasance, lowers the risk of failure and keeps both sides of the agreement satisfied.

Trust me when I say this: We don't want to lose your money if we can help it. Neither do we want a dissatisfied client spreading negativities about our brand that can be avoided. Also, neither should you want to waste time dissatisfying a consultant that, even within a few short days, understands your business model, what you are doing, how you are doing it and even if they don't tell you, know enough of what the acute and problematic details and intricacies of how even you yourself are bringing more harm to your company.

Just a few short months back a colleague of mine sent an email to all of the Bahamian based consultants that he knew, asking them to form a coalition of sorts. Which is a good, first step because we don't have a recognizable body that represents our industry in the Bahamas.

I took the opportunity to research some of the names copied in the email and was quite surprised that many of them were under the age of 50, including myself. Their fields of expertise ranged from small business services, to information technology, to legal services and accountancy and international trade and market research. It was a very diverse group of individuals.

While noticing that their skills and areas of expertise ranged, it led me to the first notion about the aura of a consultant: There is no one, short cut consultant and cookie cutter style of doing things.

videoSome persons have this perception that a consultant is supposed to be all knowing and all versed in all sectors of the universe. Nothing can be further from the truth. In fact, consultants in very many respects know very little of the particular business model utilized by a government, civic organization or company. They may have sector specific expertise, but specific organizational knowledge cannot be ascertained until you actually engage a consultant.

So, disabuse yourself of this perilous notion that a consultant is supposed to solve all of your problems with a flick of a switch. It can't happen. It does not happen. It is not supposed to happen, and you would let yourself down at every turn when you hear of one, see one or watch one operate in your respective workplace.

A second most perilous notion, which almost seems paradoxical to the aforementioned, is that some folks confuse the scope of a consultant.

Sometimes, and this is not just from my experience but colleagues express the same thing to me, is that consultants have been hired to conduct work in other areas not of their initial expertise. For example, a financial consultant with his expertise in banking being brought in to help an NGO re-organize their books, is quite different from a market research consultant being brought in to negotiate cross-border agreements with your supplier.

The unwritten rule of thumb is that you never tell a potential client no. You have to work with what the market gives you at times. But this is both dangerous as much as it is an enlightening experience to broaden your scope and learn more about what these folks are doing out here these days.

The burden in this case is equally placed on both parties to explain the parameters of what is expected for any particular project, initiative or engagement. But more-so the consultant has to have the professional integrity to be up front and honest and say: Hey, I see that you need this done, but it really is not my area of expertise; may I refer you to someone else?

The services sector is also changing rapidly, and some say for the worse when we factor in mass layoffs and low job creation.

The days of going into an office and speaking to your accountant or lawyer is long gone. If you don't catch him or her on the way out of a luncheon or seminar or at the airport, you probably would be wasting your time trying to set up a formal meeting at their offices. So, quite frankly, any and everyone with a college degree that has minimal work experience is a consultant or can be one because he has the time, hunger and reason to take on such a profile.

The same goes for consultants in the management and technical related fields, especially those that manage several different projects that deserve immediate attention in several different places.

For KEMP GLOBAL and our associate sub-contractors, I encourage them to go out and meet the people at their place and at their time. I take my show on the road as well, because I have to and it gives my firm a personal charm. I will come to you, on your time and your convenience.

It not only makes it easier for us where we don't have to spend much on accommodations, hence we can save on utility fees, but it also is a chance to go out and see the problem our clients have, right then and right now without second hand information and without having X-Ray vision through the telephone or getting a "feel" of a conversation of our client at our offices. This is important to us, because we really want to and need to see what it is you are doing.

Thirty, or maybe even twenty years ago, one would also have to wait to see their service provider via setting up formal meetings. Nowadays, due to technology and the fast paced world where results oriented practices is the fashion as opposed to the older days where establishment and name recognition really mattered, if you are not in place to deal with a problem as it arises, it is highly unlikely you will be kept on for any project. So, the more we are out there, the better.

In a nutshell, we have to be out there. Out there with a good name and a hard working spirit to boot. We prefer it that way too!



Sunday, November 23, 2014

A National Development Plan: What should be expected?

We have heard very little about the National Development Plan for The Bahamas. People from all quarters of the Bahamian society have clamoured, begged and pleaded for someone to commit to creating a proper one for a new Bahamas. For years, the calls have gone unanswered. Until now!

The government of The Bahamas has launched the initial phases of The National Development Plan. The plan is being funded by the Inter-American Development Bank, and costs for its production has been slated at over $450 thousand.

A national secretariat has been created, with Director of Financial Services, Dr. Nicola Virgil Rolle, slated as the chairperson heading a team of six.

The plan itself is in the planning stages (I hate to sound "punny", but it's true...). However, the thought of such, how it will be designed, the agencies involved, the process it should take and the overall outcome for Bahamians is something that should make the citizenry excited about the possibilities.

The usefulness of a development plan for the country also has strong merit. For far too long economic planning and development in The Bahamas has been virtually nil. Subsequently, a new department has been created under the Office of The Prime Minister, with carriage of this department laying with the Minister of State responsible for Investments, Khaalis Rolle.

There were previous attempts at providing a pathway forward with regard to national planning born out of the private sector, albeit from an aspiring politician, John Bostwick and his "Bahamas Vision 20/20".

The good part about Mr. Bostwick's "Vision 20/20" document was that it was pregnant with ideas. The document put in written and clear form what most Bahamian people saw as important for national development. However, the document was void on the "how to", the "how much" and the "which ways and means" should we proceed. Also, it wasn't as much of a plan as much as it was a statement of wishes and hopes for the future.

One can say that Mr. Bostwick's 20/20 vision was created without universal consultation, insufficient funding along with an expedient approach to an initiative that just takes a great deal of doing. But one cannot argue against the sincerity of his attempt, and one would hope that some of his ideas are embraced in the context that if it makes sense, we should investigate the possibility of these things coming to be.

In addition, The College of The Bahamas, as it continually moves towards university status, have long since had in concept research facilities and advisory consultancies with regard to national development. In fact, the college has been extremely candid in their bids to be involved in the development and planning of The Bahamas. The research put out from the college has been scant due to underfunding and the very disturbing matter of the college being without leadership with a clear mandate, not just for research, but leadership overall.

videoThe college will be a part of the process even though they do not have a seat on the board of the secretariat. We hope that this is a slight omission and that someone will be there to represent the college when the process begins in earnest.

So, here we have it: The national development plan project being officially launched at The College of The Bahamas; funding, and no doubt technical support, being provided by The Inter-American Development Bank; a secretariat formed with a seasoned civil servant at the helm with a supporting team of six; a moribund governmental department being given new life under the office of the prime minister; and a slew of ideas from the public and private sector just waiting to be fleshed out in a systematic and mechanical manner that makes sense.

But before we titter with glee, we must be mindful, as is Dr. Virgil-Rolle, on the pitfalls that a process like this may encounter. And with that we should add a few more notes along with that to boot.

For starters, we hope that any document, work or theoretical rendering offered up through this process, does not end up on the shelf along with the other reams and reams of documents, as Dr. Virgil-Rolle suggests that we should not want to happen. This is why my initial reaction to this undertaking was: Will this plan and the works produced prove to be useful as a final product?

Without a doubt it must be seen as useful, and public buy-in essential. To that end, we should strive for a superior product, one that goes deep into the recesses of our culture, attitude towards social living and government and find the root causes of things and seek ways and means to correct them.

We are under the assumption that this national development plan is being designed with the sole purpose of building a better, common life for all of us. So the final product must be one that speaks to that primarily, and not one that speaks just for speaking's sake or offers up what conventional wisdom from the current structure says is good for us.

Another point for consideration is with the notion of something like this can be done by June, 2015. I'm not certain that a properly done, well reasoned, well researched and well drafted plan that has any intentions of execution on any portion can be completed in that short space of time.

For example, extensive consultations with experts, both local and foreign, need to take place. Extensive research, engineering studies, international and national risk assessments, scientific studies and other various means of studies must be produced from these consultations and a focusing of this information must then be channelled. In addition, financial analysis, economic impact assessments under different scenarios and stress indicators need to be taken into consideration along with various counter-measures and policy recommendations when something works too well, works half-way, doesn't work at all, or is deleterious to the entire framework of national development.

During the 2002-2007 political administration, there was a study done on how to enhance the human resources of the civil service. The time it took to analyse, detail, collate and present a document that made sense, even without the necessary recommendations for policy changes and legislation drafted, took more than 2 and 1/2 years. This was just with regard to the proper alignment of the human resources of the civil service, and not anything with regard to technological modernization, product and service efficiency, or facilities maintenance or how does one finance all of this.

More fundamentally, you need data. Both historic data along with actionable and working data in real time. Data, statistics, quantitative studies and qualitative logical-frameworks have historically been neglected in The Bahamas.

Just to give you an idea of what I mean, I was a guest on the talk-show "Connected" a few days back with a colleague of mine, Lester R. Cox, on Guardian Radio's, 96.9fm. Cox presented to the listening audience a study on social progress and asked the audience that, out of 150 plus countries, where they thought The Bahamas ranked in the world? The answer was that The Bahamas wasn't ranked at all, because there wasn't enough data provided from The Bahamas on any of the study's indicators.

I'd also have to add that when doing research on The Bahamas, or reading any working paper or policy document on The Bahamas, Caribbean, regional or world comparative document, other than broad based, macro-economic and financial data compiled through virtue of our budget process that the international organizations like the IMF, IDB, World Bank and the UN use to make their broad assessments, The Bahamas is always noticeably under-represented, or figures absent due to lack of available and reliable data.
This is just for starters when we talk about crafting a meaningful development plan that one wishes not to be placed on the shelf with the other un-read and under-utilized policy recommendations for The Bahamas.

From my estimation there is a lot to be done. A lot to be done properly if we are about to do what it is that was said will be done.

We shouldn't waste our time on a product that would just sit on the shelf. We should have a totally defined document based high minded methods and see it as a working and living document. A working, living document that induces action on first best information and not reduce itself and all of us to low-ball expectations.

Along with it being a perpetual work in progress, it should also be a check-list for things we are about to do and the things we actually want done. Not what a small sub-section of the structure feels would be best, but what we as Bahamians want and need done.

We deserve no less than that.

Saturday, November 15, 2014

Repatriation: The trail of tears and fears.

No doubt the new immigration policies in The Bahamas has caused an uproar. It's not been a pretty site to see the vitriolic comments and ethnic slurs go to and fro, particularly on social media.

An example of this was when U.S. State Representative for Florida, Mrs. Daphne Campbell, attacked The Bahamas in a very unusual and mean-spirited way. Mrs. Campbell went on television in Miami on Channel 7 WSVN and asked for all tourists, all cruise ships operators and everyone that would listen, to boycott The Bahamas.

Mrs. Campbell is of Haitian heritage, and no doubt she is very proud of it as she should be. But to the extent that the fervour of her rhetoric insults the public conscience of Bahamians, based on inflated misconceptions, is where it should end.

The impetus of her vituperative and seemingly crazed assault on the Bahamian people was due to a short clip of Bahamian immigration officers performing their repatriation duties. In this short clip, officers were seen carefully leading Haitian children from homes that were abandoned by the adults in their attempt to escape capture.

Bahamian officials are trained to be responsible in this regard, and as they whisked the children away to safety from a volatile environment void of any parental supervision, they were placed into the care of The Department of Social Services until their parents could be located.

As a result of Mrs. Campbell's uninformed and vicious rant, one could only imagine that the return fire from Bahamians wasn't too friendly. It was so bad that a friend of mine living in Miami made mention of it to me, as he was concerned about not only the policies, but the relationship strains being placed on The Bahamas with Haiti and America.

This is not the first time in recent memory The Bahamas had to face criticism from dangerously uninformed "rabble-rousers" from outside of its borders, and more directly from Florida.

In 2013 The Bahamas played host to un-invited Cuban migrants on their way to Florida. As a result of their un-invited visit, they had to be detained in our detention facilities. From this, this group of very odd Cuban immigrants and their associates proceeded to then promulgate a video of their "so called" abuses at the hands of Bahamian Defence Force officers in the Detention Centre.

The video went viral, relatively speaking in Caribbean terms. Cuban-American led groups in South Florida banded together to promote the same ideas as did State Representative Campbell on The Bahamas: Boycott The Bahamas, denounce Bahamian immigration policies and basically do everything within their power to bully, harass and intimidate Bahamian officials into allowing illegal immigrants unfettered access and freeway through The Bahamas.

Fortunately, the video of the alleged abuses by the officers proved to be a fake. More fake than a $4 note. Fraudulent and baseless to boot.

In the video it was clear that the persons reported to be Bahamian Defence Force officers kicking, punching and spitting on the Cuban immigrants did not have a Bahamian accent, and it sounded as if they barely spoke English.

After it was discovered that the video of this alleged abuse was fake, the Cuban groups in South Florida, claiming to speak on behalf of the illegal Cuban immigrants in the Bahamian facilities, changed tune and then began to claim that the video was a re-enactment of events that did happen.

So, The Bahamas is not unfamiliar with uninformed attacks from persons seeking to besmirch it's name internationally. Just that this particular time with regard to the new policies from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Immigration has just been more direct in its approach.

In a nutshell, there is much to do about nothing with regard to the "new" policies on immigration. In fact, it is what we should have been doing before the problem festered into what we have now: A sub-human mess, with it being a drain on resources, coupled with the national and international security risk the flow of illegal immigrants pose in today's post 9-11 world.

For the first part, outside of the documented and legal migrants that come to The Bahamas to work, most of the time for large companies that want to hire foreign expertise for their own strategic purposes, most migrants and in particular illegal immigrants live here in sub-human and vulnerable conditions.

Particularly with regard to illegal Caribbean and Latin American immigrants living under the radar in The Bahamas, they are subject to make less than the average wage, and are open to random and targeted victimization due to their status.

In The Bahamas, we have a culture of so called "Shanty-Towns". Basically illegally structured dwellings in certain pockets of The Bahamas that are inhabited by illegal immigrants; mostly Haitians living in The Bahamas illegally. They also pose as sanctuaries for criminals and have their own community strategies for commerce and electricity; more often illegal businesses and ways of obtaining free public utility services.

Most of these Shanty-Towns are poor environments. They are owned by slum-landlords hustling for the almighty dollar at the expense of  national security, and most certainly these illegal immigrants pay rent to these slum-landlords.

There are reportedly a few cases around the islands where these Shanty-Towns are built on government, or "Crown-Land", owned by the state. These immigrants have also reported on many occasions that they pay rent to a landlord.

The sheer cost and net loss/benefit of immigrants is another cause for concern. No data or analysis has been brought to bear on how much does illegal immigration cost over the long term for The Bahamas, but it's something I am keen to look more closely on and in the process of doing so.

But for the American experience, and no doubt the methodologies can be used as a guideline for examining the issue, NGO's like The Federation for Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR) and The Heritage Foundation, have made a few estimates.

FAIR, in their 2010 study, estimates that:
"The net federal outlay for illegal aliens represents an annual expense of nearly $288 ($193 net) per household headed by a U.S. citizen. The average outlay at the state level for the same family is about $1,130 ($996 net), for a total of about $1,205 ($1,075 net).”
For an economy as large as The United States of America, for the average citizen to have a net-loss as a result of illegal immigration, should speak volumes to what smaller nation-states experience with regard to the burden of illegal immigration.

More importantly, the issue of illegal immigration is a national and international security issue.
Post 9-11, the world has changed. The borders in the USA and Europe are more closely scrutinized. One cannot simply travel to and through the USA as one wishes.
When we put all of that in the context coupled with the developments taking place in Iraq and Syria, with American born citizens and also reported Caribbean citizens becoming radicalized and seeking to join in with groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS in the Jihad, one can only imagine the cause for concern for small-nation states in The Caribbean.
A more important concern is too for America, as The Bahamas is right on their doorstep. On their doorstep and with only an inkling of who is really living in The Bahamas, the manner in which they got here, the nature of their business and what their intentions are while here.  
Without a doubt what took place with regard to the slack policies, and sub-human conditions illegal immigrants found themselves living in The Bahamas, seeking to correct those issues from a moral and practical standpoint must be taken very seriously as we move forward.

Saturday, November 8, 2014

A fine mess: The Bank of The Bahamas.

Through a newly established government corporation, Bahamas Resolve Ltd., The Government of The Bahamas has stepped in to save a failing bank: The Bank of The Bahamas.

For all intents and purposes, the bank failed. A failed bank that needed to be saved by the government. A government that was a 65% shareholder in the bank, the largest shareholding, essentially making it a government institution. No matter how you try to make it sound as palatable and as diplomatic as you can, it really boils down to failure of the most epic kind.

Under any other circumstances other than the bank being a primarily government owned bank, the bank would have gone under and we would be having a very different discussion. A very different discussion, indeed.

But, before we begin to say: "I told you so! The government shouldn't be in the business of business!!" I wish to say that we really can't exercise that luxury in saying that, because it just isn't the issue that we are presented with now. Yes, people would have the moral high-ground to say that. But, this isn't what we are presented with, as terrible as it sounds to have to state the obvious.

Over the course of the last several months, the Central Bank of The Bahamas's Governor, Wendy Craig, expressed deep concerns over the non-performing loans at Bank of The Bahamas; particularly the non-performance in commercial loans.

The bank has a massive portfolio of underperforming commercial loans on it's books. A sum total of $100 million dollars in outstanding commercial loans is being transferred to Bahamas Resolve Ltd. in an attempt for the administrators of Bahamas Resolve Ltd. to chase down the borrowers, while simultaneously clearing the bank of these loans.

Reports have it that the loans borrowed are shared between no less than 13 borrowers, averaging about $7.6 million dollars, or thereabouts, which leaves us to question how many other smaller commercial loans at the bank could be on the books that, while small in nature to the 13 borrowers that amassed the $100 million, would be enough to make things much more interesting.

Bank failure in The Bahamas is nothing new. In the mid to late 1990's, Gulf Union Bank went belly up. A lot of persons have long since forgotten what had happened to the bank; why it failed; and what happened to the depositors that lost money as a result of the failure.

To cut a long story short, Gulf Union bank had found itself in too deep with some of the loans in its portfolio. With regard to one case in particular, a borrower secured a $3 million dollar plus loan through a supposed subsidiary of a parent company and with the assets of that parent company, but legally there was nothing binding between the companies other than a personal relationship between the owners.

These kinds of activities, among others, prompted Gulf Union Bank owner Sheikh Jabor bin Mohammed Al-Thani of Qatar, to sell Gulf Union and all of its assets to another Qatari businessman, Sheikh Abdul S. Qureishi.

Sheikh Qureishi then proceeded to heap more pressure on Gulf Union Bank Bahamas by ordering more than $5 million to be transferred out of the accounts in The Bahamas to the sister company in the Caymans, and essentially triggering the real downfall and subsequent liquidation of Gulf Union Bank Bahamas.

videoGulf Union Bank and it's subsidiaries in the Caymans were ordered to be liquidated as well, and that ends that.

But, as we remember the failed Gulf Union Bank, enter in now The Bank of The Bahamas giving out very large loans, relatively speaking, at a time when the economy was bad world-wide. So bad to the extent that their balance sheet deteriorated to such a point that regulators noticed something fundamentally disturbing about their position and particularly its capitalization.

News Editor from The Nassau Guardian, Juan McCartney, on his Facebook page summed up the fine and undeniable mess that the bank had put itself in that prompted Governor Craig to raise the alarm:
"For those unclear, the Central Bank mandates provisions for capitalization at around 12 percent. Most banks in The Bahamas are provisioned around 30 percent. BOB (Bank of The Bahamas) was provisioned at less than four percent. Hopefully the BOB  (Bank of The Bahamas) bailout works..."
The Bank of The Bahamas doesn't speak on, or give information on, their lending activities. Your personal banking information is kept private, as per the law. Even though it is a government ran bank with tax payer's money, it still has covenants of a privately ran bank. So, we can only have- legitimately- a macro-look at what regulators see through their mega-data compilations.

So, the government attempted to save it. Some call it a bail out. Others have cautioned not to use the term bail out, as a bail out indicates that money was injected into the bank to prop it up. As we understand, money wasn't directly injected into the bank.

Rather, through Bahamas Resolve Ltd., the government has created another government corporation, pumped it with bonds in order to absorb the bad loans, and thus absolving the bank from it's bad loans temporarily via issuing a letter of comfort that states essentially that the government would stand by this institution, come hell or high water through these difficult times.
This is the best scenario out of all of the other options. The first, least desirable option was to let the bank fold. This would not have been doable, and not helpful in the very least.

The second least favourable scenario would be to inject hard-core cash into the bank from the public treasury in order to bulk up its reserves. The public would have been upset, and if done, would have indicated to the public that the government was prepared to throw bad money into a terribly ran bank, with the factors that caused this problem to remain in tact. In addition, the government probably would have found it difficult to do so under the terrible fiscal constraints it has found itself in.

The good part about this best-case scenario, all things considered, is that it will put Bank of The Bahamas back into shape with a clean bill of health, without causing a bank run, or wasting public funds in a bad environment.

However, with the management and board still in place, some of the personnel that caused the bank to spiral out of control, a clean bill of health is most likely a deceptive one. It looks ok, sounds ok, has performed ok so the recent books state, but it truly isn't ok.

One can only think that the board and management are left in place to assist in the unwinding and resolution of this tangled mess. Which would be the responsible thing to do, considering how different the bank is from other privately ran banks. One can also only assume that through Bahamas Resolve Ltd., more governmental oversight and scrutiny will be as a result of all of this and one can expect more moves to come in the near to medium term as the unwinding continues.

Also to be considered is that while $100 million in bad commercial loans is being placed into the care and management of Bahamas Resolve Ltd., the government is essentially taking a 100% stake in debt that really should only be a 65% stake when we consider that the bank is only 65% government owned. This is something that the tax payer should have the full confidence on that it will be handled properly and that we are not left on the hook with something that really should be a shared burden with the other shareholders.

Lastly, and most importantly, the administration of Bahamas Resolve is a very critical issue. The administrator, to be named, and the staff, must be people of inveterate probity. They, especially the administrator, should have the gravitas, courage and strength to dig into this issue and go after these bad loans. They must be respected. Respected and feared.

As said earlier, only 13 borrowers constitute this $100 million portfolio in bad loans. So, let us be honest with ourselves, the average person not of the elites of both the merchant and political class, did not get one of these loans. Loans that average out to $7.6 million, or thereabouts.

Without a doubt this is a very sensitive situation. We can only hope for the best and provide guidance as the informed and active public, while wishing the Bank of The Bahamas the very best as it tries to position itself back as a bank of soundness, and one that can re-enter international markets with a clean bill of health and steady stewardship.