top of page

Why the PLP shouldn’t win the next election

Updated: Dec 13, 2020

Dear Mr Ortland H. Bodie, Jr.,

I make the following simple rebuttals in response to your letter to the editor dated September 28, 2020 and entitled "Five reasons why the PLP will win". First, the PLP and FNM both lied (period). They both lied about VAT. They both lied about Freedom of Information. They both lied about capital punishment. They both lied about National Health Care. They both lied about Fiscal Transparency & Accountability. They both lied about their stance on the cannabis/hemp industry. They lied about constitutional reforms and amendments. "They are [ALL], to put it simply [in your words], chronic liars" #NoSlappingUp 🤥


Second, both the PLP and FNM are devoid of a National Development Plan. In my opinion, the Rt. Hon. Perry Christie is the 2nd laziest Prime Minister in modern history, who appointed a task force to consider a national development plan and to make recommendations, which, as you wrote, was submitted just before the 2017 elections. Today, it appears the Rt. Hon. Dr. Minnis is the laziest PM in history who appointed the Economic Recovery Committee (ERC) accompanied by increased staff bonuses and a various policy ideas just before what seems to be a snap election. So one must ask, where is the difference between the two? Will there be any difference between Davis and Christie given the former opted not to be the competent authority and again is for committee and committee without accountability? Will there be any difference with Minnis given he stated the entire cabinet is also the competent authority? Meanwhile his cabinet can not remain on the same page, which leads to issues with accountability and our constitution (i.e. if the PM grants himself as the competent authority but appoints another competent authority without the necessary law to that effect he would be acting contrary to his powers and ultimately the our constitution). There really isn't any difference between these leaders.

Let's now consider the ‘new’ COVID-19 action plans, which is the first hurdle to overcome in order to proceed with any national development plan. During the heat of the pandemic the PLP's plan was to test at least 10% of the population. Now the PLP's plan has snowballed into free testing for all! The issue here, like most PLP plans, is that they failed to provide a source of funding for said testing at the offset (i.e. 10% or free for all). Meanwhile, Madam Leader Arinthia S. Komolafe continuously advocated for a testing on arrival strategy. This would have literally turned the pandemic into an opportunity to earn profits from testing visitors as early as perhaps August 2020 (i.e. profits from a better priced Health Visa), and use said funds to subsidise the cost of domestic testing and tracing efforts. On the 1st October 2020, the Ministry of Tourism announced a point of entry test strategy alongside the worst tourism product in modern history (i.e. vacation in place). Shortly thereafter on the 1st of November the lie detector determined that that was lie. Question is who can we sue for maladministration?


I agree with Mr Bodie's third point except that we must keep in mind that Davis has also been tone deaf and out of touch when he make unsound submissions on behalf of the Bahamian people or travels to the USA for better treatment. I will address the latter in the next rebuttal point, and as for the former, take for example Bahamas Air collapsing and not being utilized. Recall that Davis jumped up in Parliament and argued that staff must get full salary while the average Bahamian is also experiencing similar pay cuts in industries that were operating. What about Davis being pro-oil drilling if environmentally friendly, which experts say today's oil industry is far from such best sustainability practices. Do you feel misled yet?

These OLD tactics of opposing just to oppose illustrate how out of touch he is. Do not just oppose for opposing sake. Oppose to make substantive recommendations for consideration, oppose to achieve good governance and proper compromises. It is no wonder why the Minnis administration has allegedly barred consultation with the PLP on various matters. Moreover, Davis' recent public interviews perpetuate how old and out of touch he is with the ever-increasing majority (young) voters.

With that said, it is my view that the leader of the government has failed by being out of touch with the science and commercial sense, and the leader of the opposition has failed the Bahamian people by making unsound/ tone deaf arguments. Both of which undermine good governance. This country requires proper representation on both sides (i.e. majority and opposition) in order to achieve good governance. This is why the independents and outside opposition (i.e. the DNA) must be given a seat of the table.


This leads to fourth, “our infrastructure and upgrades are crumbling right before our collective eyes.” We know around the time of every general election leaders seem to magically act to fix a couple roads and clear a park here and there. But I know the Bahamian people deserve more than these sort of dangling carrot tactics for infrastructure investments you proposed to the Editor, Mr Bodie. Moreover, you delve into the COVID-19 deaths but miss the most important point that Davis left the country and was captured without a bow while the enemy was so far away (Isaiah 22:1-4). Davis did not pose the best plan for reopening effectively, instead the PLP camp is now talking and dancing around the issue of deaths without any proper recommendations. If we look at Davis’ public statements, he purported the need to test 10% of the population... and then, in a letter to the PM, basically said figure it out and flew to the USA after being infected. He came back and now folks are cheering for him? I’ve digress.


Fifth, the introduction of a flat rate income tax across the board without correlating it to the level of income is extremely dangerous as it will undoubtedly perpetuate the income gap and inequality issue. In other words, the PLP’s income tax is counterproductive and the DNA’s proposal in this regard should be explored. The rates should be supported by substantial socio-economic considerations.

The six following points aim to address what I consider 'the meat of your letter' (i.e. “The New Deal PLP must... whenever it becomes available.”).

  1. Reducing VAT to the same random figure without any Dorian or COVID-19 economic considerations is a mistake. 👎🏽

  2. Re: Income Tax (see rebuttal above). 👎🏽

  3. The DNA’s Land Bureau could make Crown land available in a more accountable and transparent manner. ✅

  4. The National Health Initiative sounds vague as can be. The DNA has plans to make incentive schemes more efficient and is going as far as implementing better health care for UB students. ✅

  5. Entering into public/private sector partnerships is not the philosophy of the PLP (its the nationalist party) but I am glad they appreciate and understand that this mode of development is the most effective.

  6. Access to a successful COVID-19 vaccine is inevitable but does the PLP have a plan to finance the supply of the vaccine?

7 views0 comments
bottom of page