by Sir Arthur Foulkes
Bahamians are becoming increasingly apprehensive over the future of Freeport and Grand Bahama in the wake of disturbing events at the Grand Bahama Port Authority, the corporate entity responsible for the management of the nation’s second city.
First, Julian Francis resigned as chairman and chief executive officer of the Authority, then Barry Malcolm stepped down as executive vice president. These resignations were followed by an announcement that the post of deputy chairman, which had been occupied by Mrs. Willie Moss, had been made redundant.
In just about two months the top three Bahamian executives at the Port were gone. All three are highly qualified and experienced persons. Mr. Francis is a former governor of the Central Bank of The Bahamas, Mr. Malcolm a former high-ranking officer of the Inter-American Development Bank, and Mrs. Moss an experienced Bahamian attorney and administrator.
Mr. Hannes Babak was named chairman of the Authority and Sir Albert Miller was called out of retirement to take over as chief executive officer. Mr. Babak, an Austrian, is a long-time resident and Freeport licensee.
In the wake of all this, two highly-respected and politically well-connected Bahamians, Senate President Sharon Wilson and former Attorney General Sean McWeeney, both members of the ruling PLP, announced their resignations as directors of the Authority.
They complained of a lack of consultation and transparency in connection with the corporate bloodletting. In other words, they were not told and they do not agree -- at least not with the way things were done.
But the drama does not end there. Senator Philip Galanis called on the government to investigate the upheaval at the Port. The Senator, also a member of the PLP, is concerned about the appointment of a foreign licensee as chairman of the Port Authority and about the future prospects of other Bahamians in the Port.
But the Senator’s party colleague, Tourism Minister Obie Wilchcombe, weighed in with the opinion that the government ought not to get involved in those kinds of decisions in the Port.
The Minister is quoted in The Bahama Journal as saying that the government “never got in the business of the Port Authority when it made changes, when it employed the same people who people are now raising concerns about”. So he asks, “Why should I be getting in the business of what the Port Authority is doing now?”
He continued:
“ … I’m not alarmed by the changes being made by the Port Authority. They will make changes; they’re a private company; they can make changes. At the end of the day let’s hope they have a plan that’s going to benefit, not only Freeport, but the entire island of Grand Bahama.”
There is so much wrong with what the Minister says that it is difficult to decide where to begin. But Senator Galanis is right. The government does indeed need to investigate what is happening in Freeport.
This is not just another private company. This is a city which was created and which operates on the basis of the historic Hawksbill Creek Agreement between the Government of The Bahamas and a group of developers.
The government contributed tens of thousands of acres of Bahamian land as well as generous concessions for many years, and the developers put many millions of dollars into it.
From the very beginning, certain aspects of the agreement were controversial, to say the least, but the great majority of Bahamians always saw it as being good for the country.
The developers would make money; jobs and opportunities of all kinds would be created for Bahamians, and the nation would have a much-needed second city to absorb some of its burgeoning population. And so it was.
Even without this unique arrangement, the Government of The Bahamas has a right, a duty, to be consulted about the persons who are chosen to run big development projects in this country and, in the case of expatriate managers, the right to approve or disapprove.
This must be all the more so in the case of Freeport, having regard to its unique genesis and the inevitable impact on the whole Bahamas of what happens there.
Minister Wilchcombe seems to be in a pandering mode these days, and one can only wonder why. The people in his own party and many of his friends who saw in him a future leader or prime minister must now be having second thoughts.
Who runs Freeport, how, and for whom are matters of profound importance to the people of all the Bahamas, not just Grand Bahama. It is frightening to think that this PLP government is only hoping, in the words of the Minister, that they have a plan that is going to benefit the Bahamian people.
Prime Minister Perry Christie is noted for talking much while allowing too many things just to slide by, but it would tax the credulity of reasonable people to suggest that even he would be content to be a passive observer to the corporate slaughter of three Bahamians with world-class qualifications, and the appointment of a foreigner to head the Port Authority.
Certainly every Bahamian knows that such a thing could not have happened on the watch of Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham. It would not even cross the minds of the shareholders that they could hope to get away with such audacity.
The question is: Will Mr. Christie now agree to the investigation demanded by Senator Galanis, or will he simply say that he was in the picture all along?
Mr. Christie and his ministers may have had their heads addled by the siren song of globalization. So let me remind them:
It is the responsibility of the Government of The Bahamas to look after the welfare of Bahamians first and foremost; to plan the development of The Bahamas for the benefit of Bahamians first and foremost; to make sure that jobs created in the Bahamian economy go to Bahamians first and foremost, and to guarantee that top positions in every sector of the Bahamian economy are available to Bahamians first and foremost.
I do not know Mr. Babak but from what I am told he does not seem to possess any extraordinary attributes and qualifications that would justify his appointment as chairman of the Port Authority over any number of Bahamians who are eminently qualified.
Even Mr. Wilchcombe agrees that there are Bahamians who are qualified to provide the leadership that the Port Authority needs now. But he simply shrugs off the fact that an expatriate has been appointed.
Meanwhile, he seeks to score cheap political points by making an odious distinction between Bahamians who are “Nassau-centric thinkers” and those who are “indigenous Grand Bahamians”.
This appointment encourages the suspicion that there may be a conflict between what is good for the shareholders in the short run and what may be good for The Bahamas in the long run.
There can be no doubt that the late Edward St. George, with all his foibles, had a vision for Freeport and was keenly aware of the lasting contribution it can make to the overall progress and development of the whole country.
It is the responsibility of the Bahamas Government to make sure that, while the shareholders are able to make money, the short- and long-term interests of the Bahamian people are not sacrificed together with Mr. St. George’s vision. There is a balance to be struck here and it could very well be that this is at the heart of the struggle at the Port Authority.
Comments