The Tribune

THERE is a monster stalking our democracy. It didn’t appear overnight, nor did it emerge from the corridors of Parliament. It was nurtured over years of misplaced expectations, unhealthy political culture, and a growing belief that public office exists not to serve a nation but to satisfy personal desires.

That monster is entitlement.

It’s a frightening creature because it disguises itself as loyalty. It presents itself as commitment. It wears the colours of political parties and chants campaign slogans. But beneath the surface lies something far more sinister—a belief that simply walking beside a candidate a few times somehow entitles one to lifelong rewards.

This attitude is poisoning our society.

Politics was never intended to be a transaction. The relationship between an elected representative and the people should never resemble an invoice waiting to be paid. Yet we have reached a place where many believe that attending rallies, knocking on a few doors, posting on social media, or accompanying a candidate during a campaign is enough to earn perpetual financial assistance, employment, appointments, and favours. Some have reduced democracy to a receipt.

The expectation of personal enrichment has replaced the expectation of good representation. Instead of electing Members of Parliament to create policies that improve the lives of every Bahamian, many now believe an MP's primary responsibility is to solve their personal financial problems. This isn’t representation. It’s dependency.

Government has an undeniable obligation to care for its citizens. It should build reliable infrastructure, improve healthcare, strengthen education, ensure public safety, and create an economic climate attractive to investors so businesses can grow and employ more Bahamians. These are legitimate responsibilities.

Government should create opportunities. It should not become everyone's personal bank account.

Some citizens have unfortunately adopted the dangerous habit of mismanaging their finances, living beyond their means, and then turning to their MP—or even the Prime Minister—to rescue them from problems of their own making. When assistance is not forthcoming, disappointment quickly turns into threats.

"I won't support you anymore."

"I walked with you."

"I campaigned for you."

"I was there from day one."

As though democracy were a loyalty rewards program.

No one questions helping citizens during genuine hardship. There will always be widows, senior citizens, persons with disabilities, families facing medical emergencies, victims of disasters, and others whose circumstances demand compassion and public assistance. A caring nation should never abandon its most vulnerable. But compassion should never be confused with entitlement.

There’s a significant difference between someone temporarily overwhelmed by circumstances and someone who continually expects government to finance a lifestyle sustained by poor personal choices. Personal responsibility has become an endangered virtue.

Even more alarming is the growing controversy surrounding appointments to government boards. Every administration faces criticism over who is appointed to these important bodies. Yet many critics operate from a fundamentally flawed assumption—that political support alone qualifies someone for appointment. It does not.

Boards exist for a purpose. They oversee public institutions, establish governance standards, provide professional expertise, and help shape national policy. They require individuals with experience, competence, integrity, sound judgment, and the ability to contribute meaningfully.

They’re not consolation prizes. Nor should they become political participation trophies handed out because someone waved a flag, attended every rally, or walked with a candidate from one settlement to another.

That mindset cheapens public service. It insults those who have invested years developing expertise in finance, law, education, healthcare, engineering, business, and countless other disciplines that strengthen these institutions.

Walking with a candidate is admirable. Sacrificing time for a political cause is commendable. But neither activity automatically prepares someone to oversee millions of dollars in public assets or govern complex organizations.

Some who have already benefited from political generosity continue demanding even more. Satisfaction has become elusive because entitlement knows no finish line. Once one expectation is fulfilled, another immediately emerges. Greed rarely says, "Enough."

The saddest part of this culture is not merely the financial expectation. It’s the quiet surrender of dignity. There was once pride in earning one's way. Today, some openly boast about what they can obtain from politicians. They feel no embarrassment, hesitation, or shame. What should be private desperation has become public expectation. This is not healthy for the individual, and it’s disastrous for the country.

There is another disturbing dimension to this culture that deserves serious attention: the treatment of the Office of the Prime Minister. Whether one agrees with the policies of Prime Minister Philip Davis is entirely beside the point. Democracy welcomes disagreement. Criticism is healthy. Elections provide accountability. But respect for the office must never disappear.

It has become alarmingly common for individuals to appear at the Office of the Prime Minister—or even approach the Prime Minister in public—as though they are entitled to immediate access because they know him, supported him, or wish to discuss a personal matter. This should concern every Bahamian.

I have no comprehensive data from other countries. Still, I would wager my shirt that few democracies expose their head of government to the level of unrestricted personal access that we routinely accept. This is not merely inappropriate, it presents a genuine security concern.

The Prime Minister is not simply another politician. He is the Head of Government. His safety is directly connected to the stability of the nation. No serious country should normalize the arrival of people unannounced, expecting an audience with its chief executive. We have Members of Parliament for a reason. Every constituency has representation.

Branch offices exist so citizens can raise concerns, seek assistance, and communicate their needs through established channels. Allow MPs to do the work they were elected to perform. Allow ministers to administer their portfolios. And allow the Prime Minister the time and space to govern the nation.

Leadership requires concentration. Running a country cannot be reduced to an endless stream of unscheduled personal requests.

It is time for us to pause and examine ourselves honestly. Somewhere along the way, politics stopped being about nation-building and became an avenue for personal gain. We have begun measuring our worth not by what we contribute, but by what we believe we deserve. That is a dangerous transformation.

A nation cannot prosper if every election creates thousands of people waiting for individual rewards instead of millions of citizens committed to collective progress. We must catch ourselves before this monster grows beyond our control.

Support a candidate because you believe in the country's future—not because you expect favours. Vote for policies, not promises of personal benefit. Demand accountability, not dependency. Serve your country with dignity, not expectation.

Above all, remember that public office belongs to the people collectively—not to individuals seeking repayment for political loyalty. Respect the office, even if you disagree with the officeholder.

You may not respect Philip Davis the man. That’s your democratic right. But we must all respect the chair he occupies.

It is, after all, the chair entrusted with leading the Commonwealth of The Bahamas. And if we lose respect for that institution, we may soon discover that the greatest casualty of entitlement is not merely our politics—it is our democracy itself.

The monster of entitlement must not be allowed to live. We must work assiduously to plan its demise. Those of us who love this country must start by asking what we can do for the Bahamas, not what we could get.