Friday, July 24, 2009

Home National Sports Business Lifestyles Religion Arts & Culture Pulse Spice Editorial letters Opinion Foodie Sportscope Real Talks Weekend Report PDF's Classifieds Contact About Us Archive Weather

Letters | Opinion | Art & Culture | Weekend Report
Illogical conclusion It is impossible to understand the logic behind the conclusion by West End and Bimini Member of Parliament Obie Wilchcombe that a report commissioned by the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) in the aftermath of its defeat in the May 2007 general elections is irrelevant because it is now two years old, as reported in The Nassau Guardian on Monday. According to The Guardian, Wilchcombe reportedly believes that looking back does not serve the party moving forward. The clear inference here is that Wilchcombe does not think that the PLP should act on the recommendations made by the report, which was highly critical of PLP leader Perry Christie and cited his perceived weak leadership as the number one reason why the PLP lost the election. The National General Council of the PLP apparently agreed at a meeting in May for a committee to be formed, chaired by former Exuma MP George Smith, to examine the findings of the report, but The Guardian reported that a party insider said the committee was never formed. Clearly, the PLP could not have chosen a more appropriate individual to chair that committee than Mr. Smith. Probably no other current active member within the party has as strong a link with the party's struggle for majority rule prior to the PLP's historic general election victory on January 10, 1967, than Mr. Smith. He also served as a minister in various cabinets formed by the late Prime Minister Sir Lynden Pindling during the PLP's first 25-year tenure as the government of The Bahamas. Mr. Smith served as general manager of The Bahamian Times, the PLP's newspaper during the progressive struggle in the 1960s, and he had close ties to Sir Lynden and members of the National Committee for Positive Action (NCPA), an activist group within the PLP that essentially formed the foundation for the political power that Sir Lynden eventually attained. In a nutshell, Mr. Smith has a good idea of what Sir Lynden would have done if faced with a decision as to whether or not to act on the recommendations made in the report submitted to the PLP by the U.S.-based research firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner. To be sure, Sir Lynden would not have hesitated in taking decisive action to address the issues in the report, although under his leadership Greenberg Quinlan Rosner would not have had reason to suggest that he was a weak leader. Sir Lynden, of course, would have taken issue with the wording of some aspects of the report, and so do we, although the implication is absolutely correct. Consider this excerpt from the report: "The PLP's narrow demographic base of support is worrisome. Depending on older and lower-class voters is not a recipe for long-term success as the former die off and the country and its citizens become more prosperous..." The reference to "lower-class voters" most certainly is an insult to the many die-hard, grass-roots PLP supporters. What the report more likely than not was suggesting, however, is that the PLP should abandon its standard modus operandi of using the race issue to maintain its base support in the country and seek to broaden its appeal across racial lines. To be sure, members of the PLP did not need a report to convince them that the time has long past when race should be used as an issue in general elections in The Bahamas. The changing times should have convinced them that the politics of the 1960s are no longer relevant in The Bahamas of today. Giant strides have been made towards the establishment of a more racially homogeneous society in this country as a result of the increasing number of better educated young Bahamians who do not stay awake at nights worrying about whether being black will prevent them from attaining their goals in life. Surely, this is one recommendation that the PLP should want to seriously address, and Mr. Wilchcombe will be doing his party a huge disservice if he continues to insist that the report is irrelevant because it is two years old. The PLP should also take seriously the report's suggestion that the perceived sense of scandal and corruption in the PLP was also a contributing factor in the party's election defeat. Unquestionably, it was because Mr. Christie had a tendency to allow major scandals involving ministers in his Cabinet to occur without taking any steps to fire those ministers that he was perceived as a weak leader. This being the case, if the PLP is serious about making the necessary changes to enhance and broaden the party's appeal to the voters of this country — and presumably that's the reason why the report was commissioned — then a change in the party's leadership seems to be a logical step for them to take. Whether or not George Smith and his committee would reach this conclusion if they examine the findings of the report and make recommendations can only be determined if the wishes of the PLP Council are carried out and that committee is appointed. Certainly, when the report was released should not matter, if its findings as to what's wrong with the party's structure and operations have not been addressed. Wednesday, June 24, 2009