Prostitution of Government Information Infrastructure in the Bahamas

by Larry Smith

Here's the thing. We all got to make a living. And since Steve Mckinney is a political flack and ZNS hack, he gets to make a living off the rest of us.

In fact, having been in the business myself for a long time - I'd have to say that Mckinney is the most successful PR flack in the country. At $142,000 per annum (plus other business) Mckinney is raking in more bucks than the governor-general, the prime minister, the chief justice, permanent secretaries and media magnates like Charles carter or Wendall Jones.

In fact, Jones admitted as much (in amazement) on his media talk show last week when he, Fred Sturrup and Godfrey Eneas grilled Mckinney for some 30 minutes.

And the most amazing point of all is that Mckinney's government contracts included perks like paid vacations, sick leave, casual leave, gratuities, etc - all at taxpayer expense.

Mckinney has a contract to provide public relations and speech-writing services for the Ministry of Tourism, but top officials know nothing about it - and Tourism has its own in-house PR and broadcasting unit, as well as an expensive out-house PR firm. And, the prime minister says, Mckinney also has a similar public relations contract with the Ministry of Education.

Meanwhile, public relations for both of these ministries is supposed to be provided by Bahamas Information Services, another government agency that employs a number of journalists, photojournalists and videographers to produce information of dubious value at a cost of $2.3 million a year.

That's right - $2.3 million a year.

BIS was set up by the Pindling regime in 1974 to "ensure effective communications between the government and the people of The Bahamas...to assist the government with public relations, and to promote the policies, programmes, goals and role of the government."

So it would be fair to say that Mckinney's contracts are at the very least an egregious duplication of effort (if indeed there was any effort) and yet another gross waste of public funds.

For comparison, the Bahamas National Trust gets only $100,000 a year from the government to manage the country's entire national park system - but Steve McKinney gets over $140,000 to do squat. Does this make any sense?

And the most laughable thing is that with all this expensive public information infrastructure, we still can't get information from the government when we ask for it.

As for Mckinney's contract with ZNS to host the talk show Immediate Response, some might consider him a Bahamian Howard Stern, the shock jock radio host who was fired from NBC years ago and eventually moved to satellite radio in an effort to escape corporate censorship and make more money.

Except that Mckinney was pushing a hard political line on the national public broadcast station during a heated election campaign. He could have hosted a show called "the PLP Propaganda Hour", which the party could have sponsored. Then there would be no argument. It wouldn't be my tax dollars wasted on more nonsense.

But this issue should not have been dealt with on the political podium, no matter how irritating it was. And it should not have been dealt with by a call from the cabinet secretary (according to Mckinney) instructing the general manager at ZNS. And what, pray tell, does Sandra Knowles (a former GM at ZNS) have to do with any of this?

And this process is all the more incredible if, as Mckinney says, he had held similar contracts under the first FNM government. In fact, we are told that Mckinney demanded a constituency nomination and simply changed sides when he didn't get it.

So does that mean the country has to financially support this man's venality and vanity? And how many others like him are on the public payroll? It's hard to say who is the victim in these circumstances - the whore, the john or the people.

We can understand how all this could get up one's nose. But clearly the circumstances of these contracts are such that a normal review by normal people would result in their termination by due process. Case closed. Goodbye Steve Mckinney. Make it on your own this time.

What to do with ZNS

The Mckinney business is symptomatic of the much larger issues surrounding freedom of information in the Bahamas.

We had to wait until 1977 for the government to implement TV service, private radio was withheld until 1993 and private television did not switch on until 1995. All of this could have happened in the 60s if it wasn't for the usual political bullshit.

That's because "progressive" politicians ostensibly wanted to protect our cultural identity and sovereignty. But as we all know, ZNS did little or nothing to promote Bahamian culture or sovereignty, and a great deal to promote Bahamian politicians.

Today we can listen to droves of local talk shows and watch hundreds of digital channels via cable or satellite. And since ZNS runs mostly old movies, foreign soaps and government propaganda the question that naturally comes to mind is, why do we need it? And more to the point, what value do we get for the $13 million plus a year we spend on it?

The answer, for some, is because Bahamians must be able to watch Junkanoo on TV, as well as special events like state funerals, parliamentary openings or political conventions. But Cable Bahamas has a community channel and a parliamentary channel that also do these things - at no cost to the taxpayer. In fact, the obligation to do them is written into its license.

According to Charles Carter, the former ZNS boss whose private radio station now produces news for Cable Bahamas and who also runs the Nassau Guardian, "There is a cultural and educational role that can best be served by (ZNS). It should be funded by grant and its programming content should reflect the needs, concerns and expectations of our developing society."

This is essentially the same bland conclusion that the Ingraham government came to in the 1990s, but balked at implementing because of the political and financial implications. Mike Smith, who chaired the Broadcasting Corporation from 1994 to 2000, said a 1996 study recommended downsizing ZNS, selling off radio channels and running TV as a public affairs service.

But we don't really have the means to make a judgement on the financial viability of ZNS today because the BCB hasn't provided audited statements to parliament since the year 2000 - and that report wasn't tabled until 2003.

Another comprehensive evaluation of ZNS was undertaken just before the 2002 election when Sir Arthur Foulkes was BCB chairman. He told Tough Call that "the study was done in collaboration with Canadian consultants and dealt with everything: finances, viability of commercial TV, radio, equipment, staff, etc."

The conclusion was that maintaining a multitude of state-owned radio stations in a privatised market was unnecessary and costly, so they should all be divested except for ZNS 1, which would continue as a national public radio service. The same conclusion reached years earlier under the same government.

Meanwhile, the study said TV-13 should become a public affairs service funded by government grant, with local programming encouraged by offering seed money to independent producers.

But politics intervened again and nothing happened. Broadcast journalist Carlton Smith summed it up best when he spoke at a media seminar in 2005: "Many felt that with the coming of private broadcasting, the Corporation would be forced to change. But more than 12 years later ZNS remains a state-run organisation that, despite the intentions of any government, cannot work in the public interest."

So the question is, what do we do about that?

Well, perhaps we should consider whether we need ZNS at all. Even if it could be detached from direct government control, it would likely turn into a broadcasting version of Bahamas Information Services, that other pointless agency whose employees trot behind government ministers at great expense.

So if that's the objective, why not just merge ZNS with BIS, producing a single bureaucracy with no ambiguity about what it's supposed to do. Then we could set about the task of redefining the role of BIS - like abolishing it.

PLP No Longer the Default Party

The nationalist leaders and parties that achieved independence in the 60s and 70s naturally became the default political setting in their respective territories. The hard-won credentials of those who helped end white colonial rule gave them virtually unchallenged authority.

In the Bahamas (as well as other Caribbean countries) this default setting led to authoritarianism and corruption, squandering much goodwill and producing waves of emigration in the process. But eventually the emphasis shifted from ideology toward issues of competence and trustworthiness.

This shift created conditions for the first Free National Movement victory of 1992 led by the ex-PLP Hubert Ingraham. In fact, the FNM was essentially a reform movement of former PLPs, supported by a growing middle class with less interest in the animosities of their parents.

Ingraham's defeat in 2002 led some to think that perhaps we simply switched to our default political setting. Indeed, the PLP landslide under a second generation leader seemed to indicate that it remained the dominant political force in the country.

We now know that is not the case. After more than two decades in opposition, and a huge defeat after only two terms in office, the FNM may now have become the natural party of government. Unless it reforms itself, the PLP is a spent force, despite the tightness of the recent general election.

While each party maintains a base of about 40-45 per cent of the electorate, that critical 10-15 per cent swing vote of middle class families and professionals is no longer swayed by the rhetoric of the past. Both parties will have to work hard to earn their allegiance, and it is not likely to last a lifetime.

These floating voters realise that the country is just treading water and must undertake some radical institutional changes if we are to maintain our quality of life.

That means a national strategic vision to balance economic development with environmental safeguards, an energy policy that takes account of conservation and alternative fuels, fundamental reform of both education and the public sector, genuine privatisation, real support for e-commerce, greater accountability and freedom of information, a radical overhaul of the justice system, and strong measures to improve productivity and create more flexible labour markets.

It's time for Ingraham to use his (presumably) final mandate to shift the centre of gravity of Bahamian politics and set the tone of the political debate - and the standard of performance - for the next few elections.

On reflection, it's a pity Bernard Nottage didn't wait until now to launch his new party.

Comments

[Vaughn Scriven]

Larry,

Thanks for your article. I am going to print and share it with my co-workers tomorrow. They are die-hard, unrepentant PLPs but I can reason with them sometimes. Your article helps to buttress my argument with them about Steve McKinney the journalistic prostitute.

[DJosey]

Follow the money trail!

[tb]

I like the tone of this piece, you sure did come with fire on this one!

"The whore, the john or thepeople"
...poetic!

[EB Christen]

As always, outstanding column! Again, the right thinking, but more importantly... the interesting facts to support that 'right thinking'! Keep up the great work!