The Tribune

LET us consider for a moment two stories of different spending decisions.

First of all, let us look back at the decision to cancel the new multi-million dollar Central Bank headquarters.

The plan for the bank was a grand one – and it was said that it would invigorate Downtown. A public process brought a design that was said to be an “iconic structure” and a “one-of-a-kind building”.

It was to be right at the centre of the revival of the Downtown area. And then it wasn’t. Up to $12m had already been spent, it seems, and the only explanation given for the cancellation has come from Economic Affairs Minister Michael Halkitis. He said that as the country was just coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic, then “the optics of it might not be the best”. It looks bad to be spending money, especially as the government has other priorities.

Meanwhile, in today’s paper, we discover that one of those priorities is to spend an extra $50m on plans for a new prison – more than doubling the original cost.

The first plan was for $40m for a high-medium security facility. Now the price tag is $90m for a “correctional institution, administrative, housing and medical facility”.

We should point out that there is a definite need for a modern prison facility – the complaints that come out from prisoners there are long-standing and heard so often there is undoubtedly truth in them. The messages that come to The Tribune about conditions are often shocking.

The US Human Rights report on The Bahamas last year pointed out the problems too – talking of overcrowding, poor sanitation, poor nutrition and inadequate medical care.

Maximum security cells saw six men huddled in a space just six feet by ten feet with no mattresses or toilet facilities and excrement being removed by bucket.

So there is absolutely a need for a new facility. There would be a Bahamas Technical and Vocational Institute classroom for inmates – a good thing to help develop skills of those incarcerated so that perhaps they have less likelihood of a return to crime when they emerge from prison.

But if the optics are bad for building a new headquarters that would give a whole district a financial shot in the arm, how are the optics for more than doubling the price of a plan to build a prison?

A contractor has been chosen – but we do not know who he is as yet, it was not revealed by press time yesterday.

National Security Minister Wayne Munroe says that the contractor is “sorting out now the financing”.

He says the government will not pay up front but rather the contractor will build it and then payments will be made over up to ten years.

For goodness’ sake, we hope the government has learned from the previous PLP administration and the fire at the BAMSI complex that left the government checking afterwards to see if it was properly insured. It wasn’t.

In truth, we can absolutely see the need for an up-to-date prison complex that hopefully can resolve the issues that have seen our current facility acquire a poor reputation locally and internationally.

However, it just again draws eyes back to the Central Bank proposal and raises questions about why exactly that was abandoned.

Simply looking bad seems an implausible reason for such a cancellation. Would this help the area? Could we afford it? If the answer to those questions is yes in both cases, then it seems bizarre to drop the project just because of the optics.

As ever, more clarity would help – both over the reasoning in the Central Bank deal, and with regard to the prison project, who is the contractor and further details on the proposal.

With the cost more than doubling, a little further transparency would go a long way to ensuring public trust in the project.