The State Of The Nation

When I first heard that Premier Alex Scott was to give a televised address this evening, I was a little surprised. That’s the sort of thing I expect at times of grave national peril, but not too often in between. I tuned in mostly out of a sense of duty, expecting to have to sit through a turgid display of tired political rhetoric and waffle. And while that certainly was in evidence, the Premier also said a few things that actually left me quite impressed.

He began by reflecting on the recent murder of the Cooper twins. Hearkening back to an earlier time when violent incidents were a rarity and Bermudians could leave the doors to their cars and houses unlocked, the Premier expressed the hope that it would shock the country out of its sense of complacency. Listing those who have been murdered in the last ten years, the Premier called on Bermudians to “reject the slide into social anarchy”, while acknowledging that justice has not always been served in the pursuit of the perpetrators.

The Premier moved on to talk about the Social Agenda, announcing the imminent distribution of a booklet to all households outlining its seven pillars: youth development; strong community spirit; well-educated and skilled workforce; adequate housing for all; economic empowerment and opportunity; improved quality of life; and a civil and law-abiding country. Mr. Scott acknowledged the Social Agenda's increased focus on crime, saying that the government was willing and able to make the shift in its priorities. This is a welcome admission. Recent measures, including the announcement of tougher new penalties for drugs offences, have also demonstrated the Government's determination to act.

But most noteworthy was the personal commitment Mr. Scott gave:

“I take full personal responsibility for ensuring that the goals of the Government’s social agenda are met... This is a portfolio on which I shall deliver… I urge you to track our commitments against delivery… The booklet contains contact details by email and telephone of our ministers or ministries… yes, we want to be held accountable by the people we serve and are making every effort to open up vehicles by which you, you, the people, can communicate directly with us, your government.”

Impressive stuff.

The Premier went on to directly address the Government’s critics. While acknowledging that some had justified criticisms and concerns, he expressed his belief that others were just “engaged in mischief”:

“Some of these critics intend to make it difficult for us to govern effectively. They will not succeed. I have instructed my ministers to ensure that in their policy making and their implementation measures, substance is favoured over platitudes, transparency is favoured over obscurity and action is favoured over lip service.”

The Premier also acknowledged that the Government could “arguably be justly accused” of over-consulting with the public, no doubt a reference to recent criticism of the Government’s use of public money to fund focus groups and public polls. However he was unrepentant, insisting that “consultation continues to be one of the hallmarks of our administration”.

In a possible reference to Randy Horton’s recent outburst on an American Airlines flight, Mr. Scott said that he has directed his ministers to ensure that in their conduct at home and abroad they recommit themselves to the path of integrity, respect for others and good governance.

Most members of the current government seem unable to make a speech without bashing the media at some point, and this was no exception:

“To this Island’s media establishment, both electronic and print, I invite you to redouble your efforts in exposing wrongdoing by servants of the people on both sides of the political aisle, whether elected or appointed I really don’t care. And while your efforts should be zealous it must be without question that you are committed to the highest standards of journalism in your respective newsrooms. You must remember that as you investigate public officials your conclusions are only useful if they are truthful. Be mindful of the fact that you too run the risk of offending the public conscience if you pursue your mission with anything less than the utmost integrity.”

Mr. Scott touched on the work of the sustainable development team, stressing that it was intended to be a bipartisan effort, and reiterating its (still nebulous) aims.

He also mentioned independence – or “the constitutional future of the country” as he euphemistically called it. He acknowledged that “strong forces are opposed to any change in the constitutional status quo”, but went on to paint them as forces of “fear, mistrust, conservatism and their apparently irresistible urge to conjure up dark clouds of confusion for political gain”, rather unfairly I thought. He declared the meetings of the Bermuda Independence Commission a success, pointing out that hundreds have listened to and engaged each other at the debates. This seems a slight exaggeration. Certainly the meeting I attended could not have been called a debate, as the attendees could only address the Commission and no-one else was allowed to respond.

“I wish to make it abundantly clear,” said Mr. Scott, “that this Government has no intention to force this country into making a constitutional change.” However there was no promise of a referendum on sovereignty.

The Premier closed by stating his desire to create a society “based not on historical antagonisms”. I’ll drink to that.

Comments

[Andrew on 05.05.05 at 23:42]

A rather unconvincing explanation for the [sustainable development] initiative by the Premier, in his address tonight.

Did anyone else bother to watch/listen to it? I do seem to remember a similar address by the former Premier, and the controversy over its payment that quickly ensued.

Needless to say, her successor seems to have inherited her fondness for pompous rhetoric.

Quite dissapointing.

[Tiger Bay on 06.05.05 at 06:55]

Unimpressed - there has been little connection between words and actions by this Government. I don't think anyone expects that to change.

This hastily scheduled news conference was an attempt to fend of the UBP's announced intent to challenge his leadership in the House today.

[Adjustah on 06.05.05 at 07:11]

Damage control. An obvious band-aid fix to the public opinion crisis.

[J Galt on 06.05.05 at 09:04]

The Premier was also on the 107 morning radio talkshow, while I did not agree with some of his policys, I must say I was pretty impressed with the way he carried himself.

[Simon on 06.05.05 at 10:12]

I found it to be a very good address, especially because he was addressing "The Big Picture" for once instead of trying to put out the fire of some controversy. He even spoke to many of their failures in general terms. Still, words only go so far. For many (see above) the only impressive thing he could have said is, "We are resigning the Government," but a negative response hardly matters if they can actually follow through on their words. I hope we can all agree on a positive change in Government, no matter where it comes from.

[othello on 06.05.05 at 13:05]

All talk and no notion again! I hear fellow Bermudians saying exactly he same thing each day, yet no one is prepared to tackle the problems of crime that are infecting our islands. Day after day we all drive past regular drug dealing hangouts and mutter under our breath about how it was back in the day. WE ALL need to take ownership of the problems affecting our nation by supporting community and police initiatives to rid the island of illegal drugs. After all, take away the root of evil and the community will prosper, there will be less break ins to property and cars by dependant drug users and the terrible attacks on our islands visitors will subside.

[Desperado on 06.05.05 at 15:44]

Hands-up how many of you actually saw Alex Scott's speech? Not many of you I'd venture to say. I work in an office of about 50 people, the overwhelming majority of them Bermudian, most of them quite well informed about what's going on in their community. None of them, not one of them, saw the Premier's address. A few heard extracts from it played on the radio news this morning while driving to work. Most of the rest at least scanned the RG coverage. But nobody bothered to watch it. With CableVision and WOW and satellite TV, with so many options now available to them, fewer and fewer people seem to be tuning in to local television. The Premier may have thought he was addressing the nation; the nation switched channels ...

[big bad wolf on 06.05.05 at 17:04]

Talk is cheap and half way through a poor second term with crime against Tourists up along with the Twin murders and another suspect walking free from weapons charges it was time for smoke and mirrors.If they were really serious why did'nt they start when they recieved their last narrow mandate.I have been calling for action along with others on Cambridge road for five years but nothing has happened. Now the drug dealing is coming down into our club grounds at SCC.A press conference is nice noise but the promises mostly die away with the spoken word! No solution here. Vote them OUT ^..^

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 06.05.05 at 19:21]

There seem to be a lot of comments about he level of crime in Bermuda and the blame is being placed on the government.

Can somebody please explain to what, if there is an adequately manned police force, is the government of the day realy supposed to do about crime? I keep hearing this argument, not just in Bermuda but other palces as well, that the government is not cracking down on crime. The police force is in place to combat crime in Bermuda and they have the resources necessary as far as I am aware.

Bermuda already has a higher per capita police force than most other places in the world and there are places with more crime and more violent crime.

What exactly is the government's responsibility?

[Desperado on 07.05.05 at 09:08]

What exactly is the government's responsibility?

Dear God in heaven. To quote Louis Armstrong, baby if you have to ask you'll never know ...

[Bill Cook on 07.05.05 at 10:58]

Criminal activity is relative to the population numbers.For example close to home Bahamas was rated to have 52.6 murders per 100,000 the second highest in the world and 2,580.4 burglaries per100m also second highest in world, Bermuda was rated 6th highest with 2,092.9 using same ratio for burglaries that is.

The US had 9.1 murders and 1,235.9 burglaries.

Of course it is hard to confirm some numbers Brazil for example.

Traditionally Bermuda has always been promoted as being almost crime free, as to the casual outsider it seems that way.

To people like me who worked in those areas we knew that Bermuda had every crime in the book.

Facing reality is the first step in controlling the rise in crime.

Following that is to update the judicial system with out of date laws ASAP

The really stupid idea that you can hire Police with the same methodology as a pot washer and restrict their work permits to 5 yr stints makes no sense.

In the first instance it takes that period of time to fully integrate into the community to get the required cooperation needed.

No policeforce or service can ever overcome a rise in crime alone.

We lost many good experienced police skilled dectectives etc. who should have been retained in a useful capacity.

The ruling being that once you retire you can not work there again, very short sighted given the world shortage of trained police.

For information on who and what gutted the authority of the police one need only go to the archives of the Royal Gazette over past 20 yrs and read everything to do with the police.

[boogie on 07.05.05 at 11:20]

"Bermuda has one of the highest ratios of Police to civilians in the world"

"Bermuda has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world."

I think a more critical look at the stats will show that it's not quite so. I have long argued (to friends) that Bermuda is underpoliced. If we look at the legislated maximum size of the BPS, I believe Parliament says we should have 430 officers (I do not remember the exact figure). At any one time, exclude a third of that figure due to courses, vacation, maternity and court preperation.

Then with the abandonment of active patrolling (such as walking the beat or a roving motor patrol) in favour of targetted patrols, and the creation of specialised units (Task Force or whatever it's called now), this has left us with too few officers to cope with the little things.

Much as I hated Rudy Giuliani, he cleaned Manhattan up! If there was a broken window or graffiti, he got it cleaned up.

Just realise, that we have a crime problem in Bermuda when at 2 a.m. this morning there was possibly just a half dozen "immediate first responders" island wide. I mean uniformed constables sitting in the three stations waiting for a call about a burglary.

If the media was to put that question to Jonathan Smith (how many officers were on duty at 2 a.m. on May 7, 2005) I think we would get an eye-opening answer - if we got one at all.

[Bill Cook on 07.05.05 at 11:33]

Also figure in 3 by 8 hr shifts.every day.

Also the tremendous rise in sick leave, I would hypothosize (sp?) that with the lack of a future for serving foreign police that they try to get as much overtime as possible to put away as much money as possible.

In N.I. the overtime costs were staggering.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 07.05.05 at 17:47]

Desperado,

My question was based on the following premise:

Once the Government has given the police force the tools it needs to do its job the problem then has to be mismanagement of the resources by the senior officers who are given the task of tackling crime within society.

The only recourse that the Government can then take is to replace the senior officers and with a small population this is no easy task.

So, I ask again, "What exactly is the government's responsibility?"

Rather than being sarcastic, why not answer the question, or if you can’t answer remain silent and allow someone who can answer, answer.

Bill,

I think your numbers for the Bahamas are way off. According to this web page - http://www.ascotadvisory.com/News_Bulletin/9961.html - the number of homicides per 100,000 of population for the Bahamas is 13.5. This is another site you might find of interest - http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html#world.

[Bill Cook on 07.05.05 at 20:30]

Guilden,

The figures quoted were from the top ten of everything the year of publication was 1994 published in the US by Dorling Kindersley.Written by Russell Ash

Interpol who usually only release crime figures to Police orgs. relate a figure for the Bahamas during the mid to late 1970,s averaging 23.

The most constant seems to be the US somewhere around 9.

Have not gone on internet recently.

Perhaps as there is said to be quite a bit of drug trade there in Bahamas and very difficut to contain due to the widespread archapelago so many small islands it may be the primary cause of whatever homocides occur, they are so close to the US and could be an area of distribution.

Be interested in any input as to the size based on seizures of the drug trade.

I figured we have a trade here of app. $50 million PA naturally those who best know are not talking.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 08.05.05 at 17:08]

Bill,

Because the Bahamas is an archapelago of islands stretching from Cuba is the south to West Palm Beach in the North it is an "ideal" transship point for drugs.

Fortunately the drugs do no stop here. There is not a big usage problem as there is in Bermuda. The Bahamas Police Force has been able to apprehend and jail a large number of the big players in the Bahamas and as such the rate of murder has decline significantly.

It is very difficult to police the waters of the Bahamas because of the sheer size and the fact the there are 700 islands and cays in the archapelago. The U.S. Coast Guard was a bid help as they had tracking balloons throughout the Bahamas in the mid to late 80s and into the early 90s. This dramatically curtained drug shipments. The cost of these ballons was very high and they have since which been removed, which makes me wonder if the U.S. is really serious about curtailing drug shipments. Are people being protected?

[Bill Cook on 08.05.05 at 17:35]

Guilden,

Given your knowledge of the area with regard to Casino gambling, inasmuch as it is a major player as revenue earner for the Bahamas, and I am interested in the idea of a Casino here, are there any stats on whether crime increases or is not affected in any meaningful way ?

This has been discussed many times but no real studies on the possible societal repercussions have ever been done in Bermuda.

If you have any info. to share would be interested as I am sure would others also.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 08.05.05 at 21:26]

Bill,

Firstly, the Bahamas still has in place an exchange control regime. Also is it illegal for Bahamians and those deemed to be Bahamian for exchange control purposes to gamble in the casinos.

From what I have seen there have be no issues in this regard, probably because of the stiff penalties faced if caught.

As far as crime, there is no crime associated with casinos that I have seen or heard about. The casinos operate in a very controlled manner. There is the Bahamas Gaming Board that polices the actions of the casinos.

To date the Bahamas casinos seem to have had no blemishes. I am unsure of the tax that the casinos pay to the government, I have heard numbers as high as 50% but as I really have never been interested I have never tried to confirm whether this number is true.

One thing I have noticed is that the casinos are fairly inactive during the day as there are so many activities for the guests. At night that are very busy. Most guests do not come to the Bahamas for the purpose of gambling; gambling just happens to be available and during the night hours, after dinner is when guest gamble.

If there are specific areas you would like information on drop me an email and I will find out what I can.

[big bad wolf on 09.05.05 at 16:25]

We all gamble in Bermuda already...It should be legal and there should be Casinos end of story. Lucky ^..^

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 09.05.05 at 16:38]

Wolf,

I agree with you. I know many churches are openly opposed to casinos but many churches also have bingo night. Bingo, like games played in casinos, is a game of chance.

[Shark on 09.05.05 at 16:44]

dont trust casinos.............the house always has the odds stacked in favour of them............. also dont trust credit cards or loanes. Think im paranoid?

[big bad wolf on 09.05.05 at 18:24]

Heah Shark don't swim in the Casinos if your looking for blood Jaws ^..^

[J Galt on 09.05.05 at 18:49]

The fact that we can't spend our money as we see fit, casino's, gaming machines etc.. is another example of Government stepping all over our freedom of choice.

[Bill Cook on 09.05.05 at 18:56]

Guilden,
thanks for info.

I dont go to casinos, dont gamble much but used to bet on the horse racing the Classics in UK Grand National etc. find the tables, roulette etc very boring.

Of course a lot of gambling goes on in Bda and money leaves us I would rather see it remain here and taxed so we could get benefits.

I find churches very hypocritical in that regard.

I have long proposed a lottery to fund our sportspeople.

This was hugely successful in UK and saw such a change in the Olympic medal haul in Atlanta

Very interesting that the gamblers in Bahamas only really gamble at night unlike Vegas, as means they spend in other venues which helps tourism per se'

[The Limey on 10.05.05 at 18:58]

The full text of the Premier's address is available here.

[big bad wolf on 10.05.05 at 20:26]

Been Haze in the sky all week...finally figured out that it was the Priemer's speech. Hmmm. ^..^

[Andrew on 10.05.05 at 23:27]

I wonder who wrote this? I must congratulate them for absolutely butchering one of the most poetic and beautiful sentences in the entire Bible...

[Tiger Bay on 20.05.05 at 16:05]

The PLP voted to give MPs and Cabinet Members massive pay increases today.

They figure they deserve more money, as they think they are doing such a good job.

It's scandalous.

[Fourth Estate on 20.05.05 at 16:33]

The PLP are strangling Parliament. It meets less, and has very little transparency. The speaker is overtly partial.

Slippin and a slidin.

[sleepy on 20.05.05 at 16:34]

I don't think they voted. I think they just tabled it.

[Tiger Bay on 20.05.05 at 16:37]

Yes, they tabled the motion. Shows where their priorities are: in their own pockets. Must be part of the social agenda.

The Bermuda Government has the most incredible wage inflation.

[Bill Cook on 21.05.05 at 17:33]

Would it be fair then to say that we have the best politicians that MONEY CAN BUY ?

Be interested in all opinions on that as we pay their salaries.

[chapa on 21.05.05 at 23:08]

I found it laughable that Scott should compare the salaries of Bermudian politicians with those of the USA, Britain and Canada.

[Andrew on 21.05.05 at 23:22]

If only a reporter at the press conference would ask the Premier:

"Sir, could you provide us with the population figures and tax revenues for the countries you just listed?"

[chapa on 22.05.05 at 11:22]

Say no more! Just ludicrous...he is so desparate to be a world player that it is quite pathetic!!

[Pitts Bay on 22.05.05 at 12:12]

Listening briefly to the news on Friday, I seemed to hear the Prem. list off the US Prez, Canadian PM, Britsh PM, all with several hundred thousand $ salaries, then I heard the ref. to Jamaica!!. I think the quote was $79K pa. for the PM of Jamaica (correct me if I heard wrongly)

WOW - that is less than the Prem makes here in Bda.!! Maybe there should be a salary reduction instead of an increase!!

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 22.05.05 at 18:01]

Tiger,

"The PLP voted to give MPs and Cabinet Members massive pay increases today."

Here you go with you propoganda spreading again.

The following is a direct quote from RG:

"The Premier tabled a bill in the House of Assembly yesterday morning establishing an independent Board to review and make recommendations to the Legislature concerning the salaries of its members – MPs, Senators and Ministers."

Where in this does it say that the PLP voted to increase the salaries of MPs and Cabinet members?

The article goes to discuss the possibility of Minsiters being fulltime, which should be the case. If we want the best and the brightest to manage the country than surely the salary has be attractive. Forget about the other countries we need to consider the cost of living in Bermuda when determining the salaries of our MPs. I don't know about you but I don't want my MP to be living in poverty.

If you are going to be critical at least use facts in your criticisms.

[chapa on 22.05.05 at 18:11]

I am no convinced that increasing the salaries of MPs will necessarily attract the best and the brightest. It seems to me that it will attract those who are unable to be successful elsewhere...will PLP ministers such as Dr. Brown and Ms. Cox give up their day jobs to be fulltime MPs knowing full well how difficult it will be to re-establish themselves in the private sector should they lose their seats or their positions in Cabinet.

Does Bermuda, with a population of 60,000, really need full time MPs - especially as the Civil Service is already so large and taking care of the day-to-day operations.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 22.05.05 at 21:03]

Chapa,

I do not disagree with you regarding people like Ewart Brown and Paula Cox, however, with the positions they currently hold in Cabinet they are very close to beign fulltime Ministers now.

Your point regarding the salaries and not necessaily being able to attract the brightest is well taken, however, without there being some financial attraction there is not hope of attracting the kind of people we need running the country.

As far as the salaries attracting those that would not be successful elsewhere, under another post I have raised this point that anyone running for public office should have to produce a statement of wealth. In so doing it could have the effect of weding out those who are looking at it purely from a financial perspective. Further the statement of wealth would determine those who are not too far from bankruptcy, who, cannot hold a seat in Parliament anyway.

I amnot saying that politicians need to be wealthy but they shoudl not be relying to heavily on their income from their political postions to keep their heads above water financially.

Just my thoughts.