The Tribune

EDITOR, The Tribune.

The original concept of Urban Renewal 2.0 was and still remains a good one in that the primary objective is to improve, cosmetically, one community at a time. While this is a good concept, however, we must ask ourselves whether or not it is still relevant.

While we are able to cosmetically change the environment of our inner city and other challenged areas of the major population centres, which is not a bad thing, we have seemed to have failed in the real necessity of encouraging individuals in these areas to reconstruct the way they think; see themselves and the wider community.

A large number of our younger people, especially the male of the species, seemingly are lost; anti-social and hell bent on causing havoc in and through their respective turf or environment. Conflict resolution is an unknown phenomenon. A conflict, real or perceived, is settled by violence, inclusive of murder. Many of these same persons either dropped out of high school and have little or no marketable job skills or entrepreneurial. In many cases, large percentages will be obliged to turn to a life of petty crime and end up in The Bahamas Correctional Centre.

Once a criminal record is attracted, these individuals are consigned to an existence outside the main stream economy and the cycle goes on until either stopped by an individual transforming his/her mind (way of thinking) or, sadly, by death. As a nation we are losing too many of our human resources to all sorts of things, preventable chronic disease and personal violence, included. This must stop or be reduced to the irreducible minimum.

Our social and religious partners are not, in my opinion, being utilised to the extent where we will all be able to see and feel the difference by their contribution. The political directorate does not have a monopoly on good sensible ideas as to the transformation of individuals and communities. These partners must be given the tools and resources by stakeholders so as to accelerate the achievement of the objectives of Urban Renewal 2.0

The awarding of small contracts for home repairs and the construction of sidewalks has been called into question in that it would appear that alleged cronyism may have something to do with who or what company gets one or more. This leaves a bitter taste in many persons’ mouths in that the perceived political supporters of other parties may be shut out of the process.

We in The National Institute for public Policy, which I am privileged to lead, expects great things out of Urban Renewal 2.0 now that the Hon Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Works (with responsibility for urban renewal), Philip “Brave” Davis (PLP-Cat Island) has been allocated a Minister of State in the form of the Hon Arnold A Forbes (PLP-Mt Moriah) to assist him in a meaningful way.

The former Parliamentary Secretary in that ministry, the Hon Renward Wells (PLP-Bamboo Town) is not a real PLP and he may have been too busy seeking ways and means to derail the agenda of this administration. Urban Renewal 2.0 is the perfect vehicle by which the gold rush government may be able to wipe away the tears from every eye and to encourage transformative processes in our collective lives as a people and as individuals.

Yes, Urban Renewal 2.0 is still relevant but it must be tweaked and the rest of the Urban Renewal Commission must be appointed and announced. The current co-chairs are doing a wonderful job but the committee must be more than just represented, publicly, the two individuals. Mind you, the Rt Hon Prime Minister made an excellent choice in the appointments of the Hon Cynthia “Mother” Pratt and the Hon Algernon SPB Allen as co-chairs. They have both risen to the occasion.

As we go forward into 2015 there is no time to be wasted if we are to rescue, rehabilitate and encourage the mental transformation of our people who are or have fallen through the societal cracks. To God then, in all things, be the glory.

ORTLAND H BODIE Jr

Nassau,

January 21, 2015.