DEPUTY Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis says he has no reason to apologise for having voted against the 2002 constitutional referendum that would have put Bahamian women on an equal footing with their male counterparts because it was Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham who had inspired the results when he “politicised” the vote.
WITH a foreign publication predicting that the once promising Baha Mar resort would bankrupt the Bahamas, the resort’s court appointed receiver has announced that there is a “good expectation” that the $3.5 billion hotel will be sold before September. Obviously, the hotel’s opening date will follow.
“WHO IS that woman?” snarled a Bahamian man with the curl of the lip. That woman happens to be Supreme Court Justice Indira Charles of St Lucia.
THERE are so many red herrings, and scare mongering tactics being used to scuttle the June 7th constitutional referendum that confusion could end it in calamitous defeat.
WE ARE more than surprised, in fact we are shocked at the position taken by the first Bahamian woman to serve as Chief Justice of the Bahamas (1996-2001) and President of the Bahamas Court of Appeal (2001 to 2010) on the referendum to be held on June 7 to decide whether Bahamian men and women should have equal status in our country.
ONE WONDERS what part of equality some of these preachers do not understand.
BISHOP Walter Hanchell, instead of encouraging a “yes” vote on June 7th in the constitutional referendum that will at last give equal rights to Bahamian men and women, has chosen to play on the fears of insecure Bahamian men by warning that if Bahamian women’s foreign husbands were to be given status on marriage it would encourage an “influx” of foreign men using Bahamian women as a “ticket” to get work.
IN THE debate on the recent brazen disclosure of an environmental group’s confidential e-mails on the floor of the House by a government minister, using parliamentary privilege as his cover, the unkindest cut of all got lost in the small print.
WHILE Prime Minister Perry Christie was desperately trying to ward off the fall-out from the “Panama Papers” by assuring foreign investors that the Bahamas has one of the most stringently regulated banking systems in the world, and secrecy was of top most importance, his Foreign Minister was busily defending the right of a government minister to leak the private financial files of an environmental organisation on the floor of the House of Assembly under the guise of parliamentary privilege.
IT LOOKS as though the two Freds — Smith and Mitchell — are on a collision course as they head towards 2017 and what promises to be a most interesting election.
A RECURRING question behind the police investigation into death threats against the Save the Bays environmental group comes from Commissioner of Police Ellison Greenslade who wants to know why there were no complaints to police about the death threats before now.
ON Thursday, October 10, 2014, Prime Minister Perry Christie, speaking at the second annual National Data Protection Symposium, recognised the importance of data protection. It had, he said, become “an international issue of great concern.”
DATA Protection Commissioner Sharmie Farrington-Austin, cautioning against tabling private citizens’ correspondence in the House of Assembly, has warned that it is “a most dangerous trend that leaves society open to chaos”.
THE ANGRY words being exchanged in the House last week have been building up from the last Christie administration over a six-acre piece of property owned by fashion designer Peter Nygard.
“CANADIAN fashion mogul Peter Nygard has been accused of orchestrating a murderous plot against his billionaire neighbour Louis Bacon and lawyer Fred Smith, his chief opponents in an ongoing campaign against development at Nygard Cay, according to court documents filed yesterday.” This was the lead article in The Tribune on Thursday, March 10 . . .