The Tribune

TO many foreign observers, the ugly spectacle of the current US Senate nomination hearings for the Supreme Court being shamelessly politicised yet again makes a mockery of America’s democracy.

This time, even before any of the allegations of sexual misconduct, Democrats declared their intention to vote en bloc against the nominee without considering his qualifications, experience and suitability for the job.

Although there have invariably been political overtones in the past, outsiders question a system that allows such weight to be given to the likely political leanings of a nominee when the function of a judge is to interpret and uphold the law in an objective and unbiased manner irrespective of political beliefs.

Such politicisation is inconsistent with the separation of powers in a democracy. The legislature, executive and judiciary should each fulfil its function independently without interference but at the same time provide the vital checks and balances needed to safeguard the freedom of all.

In a Westminster-style parliamentary system, the separation of powers is equally important. But the system works differently because the Prime Minister is a member of the legislature as well as being head of the executive branch of government, and his actions can be constrained by Parliament which has supreme authority because it constitutes the voice of the people.

Although everyone is subject to the law of the land - even the lawmakers themselves - in a small country like ours the checks and balances on prime ministerial power are weaker than in, for example, Britain with its large Parliament.

When the ruling political party has a huge majority, as is the case currently in The Bahamas, and the Opposition is consequently weak, the Government’s actions may not be scrutinised effectively.

It follows that the role of the fourth estate and of pressure groups and other bodies – including, for example, an organisation like the Bahamas National Trust in relation to environmental issues – becomes increasingly significant in seeking to curb the excesses of a sitting government.

Against this background, the performance of our Prime Minister some 18 months into a five-year term is causing concern, though his parliamentary colleagues are unlikely to stand up to him and thereby put their own jobs at risk. Dr Minnis is reputed to be autocratic and dictatorial and seems to regard even constructive criticism as a challenge to his authority rather than a basis for rational internal debate.

One result of such arrogance, which can verge on hubris, is a tendency to shoot from the hip in an arbitrary manner that appears to be ill-considered and can be dangerous. The most recent example is his public pronouncement that too many work permits for foreigners are being issued.

It was unclear whether this was the harbinger of a new immigration policy or simply an off the cuff observation. It appears to have been the latter for it is hard to reconcile such remarks with the new Commercial Enterprises legislation to improve the ease of doing business by liberalising and streamlining the granting of work permits.

It is reasonable to protect the interests of qualified Bahamian workers, but his words were nonetheless crass and politically inept because creating uncertainty about employment could have potentially damaging effects both on foreign investment and on planning by local companies needing specialist expertise from overseas. A prime minister’s public utterances matter and they can be misinterpreted.

On a broader front, add examples like the controversy surrounding the Oban oil storage facility and refinery in Grand Bahama and the purchase of the Grand Lucayan hotel – not to mention the delay over confirmation of a Chief Justice – and it is unsurprising that people are beginning to question Dr Minnis’ judgment.

The word on the street is that the sense of disappointment with a Government that promised so much after its crushing victory in last year’s election is growing by the day.

One important issue is that after the 60 percent hike in VAT people want to know exactly how it is fulfilling its undertaking to cut public expenditure; and, as just one example, many are indignant about the large delegations that accompanied Dr Minnis at last year’s Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in London and, recently, on his trip to New York for the annual session of the United Nations General Assembly. It is hard to see the need for so many people and how such expenditure can be justified. His explanation in the House of Assembly this week was unconvincing.

The sad fact is, after the initial euphoria, disillusion is now rife. Whether the opposition PLP will be able to reinvent itself, beginning with its upcoming party convention, remains to be seen.

But we believe unless this FNM Government starts to show it is really working in the best interests of the Bahamian people it will become increasingly unpopular and may be in for a rude shock at the next election. That is still far off but it needs to start improving its performance now.