, , ,

Statistics are only a shock because teenagers are being ignored

It seems to have shocked government officials and education administrators that 20 percent of teenagers have attempted suicide and 25 percent have considered suicide.

Teenagers who are struggling through the days of a high school that is not responding to their learning needs and hearing the national ridicule of them and their supposed inability to perform at the academic standards required. Teenagers who are responsible for their younger siblings and, in the absence of appropriate public services and support mechanisms, must take them to school, pick them up from school, prepare meals for them, and help them with their homework.

Teenagers who are preyed upon by adults, sexually assaulted, and blamed for the violence they experience. Teenagers who are forced to participate in crime lest they become victims of violent crime, then are characterised solely on their criminal affiliations and activities with no consideration of the the failure to prevent or intervene.

Teenagers who are bullied at school and either get no support from adults or never bother to report it because their first bullies were adults. Teenagers who are forced to work in order to meet the basic needs of their households, and are harassed, disrespected, and dehumanised at work, whether by employers, employees, or customers.

Teenagers who cannot participate in extracurricular activities because of cost barriers and/or the adult responsibilities they must shoulder. Teenagers who are harassed by people in positions of authority, including police, just because they are young and visible.

Teenagers who are experiencing changes in their bodies and their moods that they do not understand and for which they are punished. Teenagers who witness violence in their homes every day and live with the fear that they will one day return home and find a dead parent/guardian/sibling.

Teenagers who cannot identify a single adult they trust to listen to them and help them through a difficult situation. Teenagers who do not have access to mental health care and are, instead, told to pray, made to go to church, and/or sent to untrained or undertrained “counsellors” who cannot give them the support and tools they need to navigate the challenges they face.

Teenagers who struggle with addiction. Teenagers who are abused and told it is discipline. Teenagers who are beaten by adults who use them as punching bags on which they unleash their frustrations. Teenagers who carry the stress of “holding” illegal substances and weapons for people who have power over them. Teenagers whose homes are less safe than the street. Teenagers who can barely sleep at night. Teenagers who are keeping secrets no one should have to endure, much less refrain from ever speaking, preventing them from getting help. Teenagers who put their lives on the line in various ways that are ignored anyway.

The realities of young people are often ignored, sometimes discussed with complete detachment from the people involved, and almost never acknowledged — a requirement for appropriate intervention to take place.

Generalisations about young people are publicly made with little challenge. They are seen as unintelligent, troublesome, ungrateful, and even deserving of any misfortune that befalls them. They are well aware of the assumptions made about them, the accusations made against them, and the general sentiment toward them. Some of them even know that they are not all having the same experience, and that their race and class make a difference.

It is difficult for adults to understand themselves as having value and being worthy of love, care, and life itself. How much more difficult must it be for young people for whom even the shortest encounter is magnified and can feel devastatingly insurmountable?

Schools may now be focused only on academic development, but that is a missed opportunity and an injustice to the people — the children — it is meant to serve. School should not be a place for children to be spoon-fed information in order to regurgitate it while being molded into robots that do as they are told in order to be easily controlled when they enter the workforce. It should be a place for them to engage in learning, through the delivery of the curriculum and interactions with the people around them.

Children, including teenagers, need to connect with one another. They need to connect with their teachers. They need to learn to navigate relationships, to build trust, to identify unsafe situations, to work through disagreements, and to recognise the difference between what is normalized (and unsafe) and what is actually a normal situation or behavior.

Schools are a critical site for intervention. This is where irregularities should be most apparent. Teachers and administrators should notice the state of children’s clothing and hygiene. They should notice changes in patterns of attendance, behaviour in class, homework delivery, and testing. They should understand that the interest and effort of the child is not the only factor involved. Which children are sleepy? Which children are hungry or undernourished? Which children are showing signs of stress, anxiety, or depression? Signs that a child needs help can only really be investigated when there is a real relationship and trust exists so that the child can honestly answer questions.

Emotional intelligence needs to be a part of the curriculum, and it needs to be an area of focus in professional development for educators. All teachers and administrators need to be able to empathise with children. They need to be aware of their own beliefs and biases, and they need to know how to regulate their own emotions. They need to truly care about the children who are in their care, and help them to develop the skills to recognise their emotions and talk about them. They need to be trained in suicide intervention.

Children need to feel safe enough to share what is happening, especially when there is a chance that they will feel embarrassment or they fear that they will be punished for telling the truth (which may be framed to them as “private” or “family business”). Building this level of trust takes time and intention.

Children need to know that there is help available for them. If there is a free breakfast program, they should know where and when to go, and it should be easy to access. If there a mental health professional on staff, they need to know how to find them. They also need to be aware of the Department of Social Services and what can be accessed there. The assumption cannot be made that parents/guardians know or that they will initiate necessary processes.

Sometimes children are considering suicide because their lives seem untenable. Living does not seem worth it. It could be that they do not have the support they need. It could be that they think they are making life difficult for their parents/guardians. It could be that they are struggling to manage strong emotions. It could be that they need ongoing mental health support, without judgment. Life is not easy for all children. There are challenges they face, and many of them try to face them alone.

We need to ensure that the children in our lives know that they can safely talk to us and that we will help them through anything they are experiencing. Parents/guardians are not always able to provide all of the support that children need, and they may not notice that something is wrong. There are many reasons this could be the case, and there may be the desire to cast blame, but first, focus on the children. It is not their fault. As long as there are other adults in their lives, they should have attention, they should receive care, and they should be given the access to the resources and services that are life-affirming.

The statistics have been shared. The shock should have worn off by now. The concern should still be there. Action is needed. Mental health needs to be a priority. The curriculum needs to respond to the needs of the children, and educators need to acquire the skills to do the same.

 

Published in The Tribune on July 17, 2025.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Politics – full of sound and fury

The next general election is just down the road and around the corner. The current administration is making promises and already signalling the need for more time to “continue” its work and the opposition is pointing fingers and asking questions. Political parties are starting to reveal their candidate slates as rumours about who will stay, who will go, and who will be newly nominated fly around.

Power struggles within political parties are coming to the fore. The media is in a state of perpetual readiness for stories of all kinds and sizes as it relates to internal political party issues, lambasting of one party by another, candidate announcements, and the possibility of an early election.

Partisan politics in The Bahamas is, by design, an absurd theatre that piques curiosity even in its monotony and predictability. Politicians are current and prospective employees of the Bahamian people. When they seek employment, they sing and dance, sing and dance, sing and dance.

Empty promises flow from their mouths with boring, repetitious, uninspiring rhetoric until they resort to name calling and lobbing accusations at others, punctuated by catchphrases and snippets of music that do nothing more than make people laugh. The employers are seated in the audience, eyes glued to the stage, watching the performance. Casting was done without their input. The stage was already set. All they can do is spend money at the concession stand and mindlessly eat and drink as they watch the show someone else selected.

Some audience members wonder what is going on backstage. Who wrote the script? Who is directing the cast? Why were these people even cast in these roles? Some notice the dark corners of the stage and try ‘to see what is happening where the lights are dim and the view of some performers is obscured. There is little room, it seems, for participation. Employers watch the show, waiting for the breaks between acts to discuss, make predictions, and argue with one another about the meaning of it all. Only when the show is over do most of the employers take their positions, ready to decide who will win it all with a single review—the vote.

When they are hired, the employees lose interest in pleasing their employers, even at the most basic level which, in our case, is putting on a show of dedication to the work that the employers—the people—want done. They take to the stage when it suits them, regardless of the presence of a waiting audience. The frequently show up unprepared, some never having attended a single rehearsal. It sometimes becomes clear that the employees fail to work together backstage before attempting another one-way engagement with audience. They sloppily deliver unplanned monologues and are thwarted by simple improv activities. They show that the backstage coordination is often nonexistent. They reveal their arrogance in their insistence on being a part of the performance, regardless of their levels of preparation. The stage, they believe, is theirs.

Once the prospective employees secure their positions, their already inadequate engagement with employers exponentially worsens. The performance required to get the job has depleted them, not only of energy, but the ability to pretend to care about the experience of the audience. If they sit in the theatre, in complete darkness, so be it. It is their own fault for expecting a show. The season is over. They should be grateful for the amateur hours that, from time to time, make use of the theatre space.

Politics can certainly take another form. There is the potential for the people, the employers, to reclaim power. It is entirely possible for the current and prospective employees to be held to a higher standard.

The existing system is dysfunctional. The existing practices disadvantage the people. Politicians see themselves as performers in a play, and they have no motivation to change the way they play their parts, much less commit themselves to affecting the reality that sits just beneath the fiction they use as cover. We, the people, know, to varying degrees, that what they see as a bit of fun amongst themselves is actually our lives. Allowing them to write the script and cast themselves and people like them is acceptance of ill fate.

The people vying for our votes are not leaders, and they are not trying to be leaders. They are satisfied to pretend. The fact is that we need representatives. One of our greatest struggles is that the people who get our votes—almost exclusively because we reject the people or the associated party running against them—do not know, care about, or ask us about the issues we face daily and need to have addressed. They do not live in our neighbourhoods. They seem to drive on different roads, present at different healthcare facilities, and send their children to receive a different quality of education than that which is available to us. We have to admit the self-governance and majority rule are not what we have when the people in parliament are not, in fact, like us. Worse, they prove, repeatedly, that they have no interest in even knowing what it is like to be us. If they did, they would engage us in the processes that have already begun ahead of the next general election. They are still more than comfortable with making a series of decisions with no input from the people directly affected by them, then turning to us with a singular question: This set of actors, or the other?

We need electoral reform. We need to know how political parties are funded. We need to be involved in the selection of candidates. We need to know when the election will be held, every single time, through a fixed date. We need to be assured that we will not have to endure the incompetence of any Member of Parliament for five years, equipped with a recall system. We need to be able to choose the best candidate in our constituencies without endorsing the leader of their political party to the prime minister. We need the boundaries to be set, not to be tampered with every five years. We need political quotas to reach gender equality in frontline politics. We need a modern system for voter registration and the tallying of votes. We need a national development plan that drives the agenda for every term and beyond.

We need a government that is led by the people. We need politicians who are the people, in every sense, and commit themselves to the highest good of the people, centring those in situations of vulnerability. We need to them to have integrity and be led it, and we need them to be discontented with the systems that do not serve us, such that they work together, with us, to build what we need rather than use the opportunity for personal gain.

At Women’s Wednesdays this evening, Equality Bahamas is facilitating a workshop designed to identify issues and develop recommendations to address them. There will be working groups on two thematic areas—social services and the environment. Members of the public are welcome to participate in one of the working groups at 6pm at the National Art Gallery of The Bahamas on West Hill Street. Register at tiny.cc/fbc2025.

Published in The Tribune on July 2, 2025.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Labour Day and partisan mockery

Year after year, the Progressive Liberal Party sours national holidays that commemorate major achievements of the Bahamian people by claiming ownership, taking up an ordinate amount of space, and attempting to make them partisan.

Moments in Bahamian history are reduced, again and again, to a political party that relies heavily on its history—a far cry from its current state and demonstrated values—to maintain its fanbase and try to attract others. Majority Rule Day, Labour Day, and Independence Day all suffer the consequences of a political party—and a government administration—that prioritises being credited for historic milestones over national celebration, as one people, and creating opportunities for young people to learn more contemporary history of The Bahamas and for residents to advocate for the realisation of the benefits those achievements should have brought.

It is a loss for everyone when any political party seeks to dominate important days in the calendar year or tries to downplay the national significance of these holidays—days of observance—which is the repeated loss of opportunities to build a collective spirit, respect for our history and the people who made their mark on it, names known and unknown, and foster a culture of action by the people to create the change we need.

On Labour Day, it would be appropriate to acknowledge the wins of the labour movement and raise awareness of and garner support for actions as prioritised by workers.

What issues still exist in the workplace? What are the issues that are emerging now as society significantly changes, often outpacing the systems in place in the workplace? What needs of workers remain unmet? Which conversations have been “tabled” and never considered again? What are the relatively small demands that can be championed and actioned?

Labour Day is political. It ought to be political. The issue is that it is made into a partisan mockery, used to gain points and, near to general elections, to gain votes or excite party followers without doing an ounce of work.

In response to a question about social movements at a time of “American global hegemony, neoliberal economic relations, militarised counterinsurgency at home, and racial ‘colour blindness,’” speaking to both the US and global political climate in 2020, Angela Davis said, “I suggest that we need movements that pay as much attention to popular political education as they pay to the mobilisations that have succeeded in placing police violence and mass incarceration on the national political agenda. What this means, I think, is that we try to forge an analysis of the current conjuncture that draws important lessons from the relatively recent campaigns that have pushed our collective consciousness beyond previous limits. In other words, we need movements that are prepared to resist the inevitable seductions of assimilation.”

This is, of course, focused on the state of the US, yet we can take the recommendation that is at the root of the response. Popular political education is requisite to sustained organising.

People need to have an understanding of the conditions we live within, beyond the individual experience. Workers’ demands are not about the realities of one worker, the inequalities in one workplace, the violence of one employer, or the instability of one industry. It is about the ways that workers are regarded as a class and the understanding (and acceptance) of what is and is not considered work, what is and is not considered productive, what is and is not considered valuable, how value is assigned to tasks and the people who do them, who does and does not share in the profit, and what is and is not a safe environment.

A strong, sustainable labour movement spreads across industries, generations, and income levels, relying on political education to connect people. When systemic issues are identified and their characteristics known, the analysis of capitalism, racism, sexism, and xenophobia and their impact on labour is necessary, productive, instructive, and motivating.

The conversation is no longer about remote and hybrid in isolation, but about the commitment to systems that demand that employers or their agents lord over workers, controlling their tasks, the way they perform their tasks, and what they do beyond their tasks should they have the misfortune of appearing idle for five seconds.

This is not solely a drive toward greater productivity, but a breaking of will and conditioning of the worker to accept the dominance of another which is rooted in “isms” so many try desperately to ignore, pretending they are inconsequential in this place.

Collective consciousness does not just come about one day. It has to be built. It has to be nurtured. It comes from an understanding of history and the fact that the strides made in the 50s, 60s, and 70s were never meant to be the final steps. They were not the end of struggle, and they were not the last wins. They were always foundational, meant to be built upon by people who have information about what was done and how, now equipped with greater access to information and new technology to enable deeper analysis, more direct demands, and targeted actions to apply pressure to decision-makers.

On a podcast in 2022, Davis said: “I’m aware of the ways in which, especially in capitalist societies, there’s a tendency to focus on the individual at the expense of allowing people to understand that history unfolds, not as a consequence of the actions and the words of great individuals, but rather as a consequence of people coming together, joining hands, and uniting with their differences—not across their differences, but with their differences—in a quest to create more freedom and more happiness in the world.”

One of the stumbling blocks in any movement for change is the inability to work with differences. There is the refusal to acknowledge differences, there is the reluctant agreement to work together despite differences, and there is the alienation of people who are different in particular ways.

Working with differences is not easy. It requires, to an extent, solidarity. It demands that everyone face their own privilege and acknowledge the violence that others face as a result of the hatred of difference.

Standing together is a requirement. Across fields of work and across party lines, we must see the possibility of unity and the responsibility we have to build it. We must acknowledge it as a requirement for progress.

We have more common with one another than we do with the beneficiaries of capitalism and (low-)wage labour, and the differences among us are what show us all of the systems at play so we can develop tactics that target them all and benefit us all. We must submit ourselves to the learning process and be bold enough to engage in learning in public ways, enabling others to learn with us, grow with us, and join us in creating discomfort for those who are far too comfortable with the separation and the profit it drives to them every day.

Published in The Tribune on June 11, 2025.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Gender parity and equal standards

On May 1, 2025, in what has been described as a “groundbreaking” moment in Caribbean frontline politics, Kamla Persad-Bissessar of the United National Congress (UNC) became the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago. Perhaps even more interesting than this is the fact that this is the second time she has been elected to this position.

What makes this groundbreaking, then, is not that a woman now has the position of Prime Minister, but that woman hold the top three constitutional offices in Trinidad and Tobago. Pennelope Beckles-Robinson is the leader of the opposition, the People’s National Movement (PNM). Christine Kangaloo, who has been president since 2023, was responsible for swearing them in.

Last week, social media was full of posts by Caribbean people celebrating the moment, highlighting these three women in these three positions, asserting that it is not only progress, but an uncomplicated achievement. It is not unusual for social media posts to lack gender analysis, and it is not unusual for people to see numerical and proportional increases as synonymous with the true advancement of women. Quantity, as we all should know, is not quality, so there is more to consider.

Following the US presidential election, Persad-Bissessar, as the (then) Opposition Leader, made clear her position on the Biden administration. She said, “They focused on pushing a woke, extreme left-wing agenda that offended basic common sense and morality, overturned the norms of civilised public life, disoriented and mutilated children, censored and cancelled dissenting views, disparaged religious and conservative values, fuelled wars around the world, weaponised the judicial system against political opponents and increased nepotism, corruption, crime, poverty, homelessness, and wealth inequality.”

Persad-Bissessar went on to congratulate and celebrate the current US president. She said: “He has survived assassination attempts, political persecution, and years of personal attacks, but he triumphed in the end.” She added: “I look forward to the return of meritocracy, excellence, and intelligence as a standard criterion for accessing equal opportunities.”

This position is cause for concern for anyone who cares about and is committed to the achievement of gender equality and full access to human rights, especially for those in situations of vulnerability including women, children, LGBTQI+ people, people with disabilities, and people experiencing poverty, all of whom are disproportionately affected and deliberately targeted by the dangerous actions taking by the current US administration.

We do need more women in positions of leadership. We do need to reach gender parity in all levels of governments. We do need women to have decision-making power. We do need women to design and implement policies that move us toward gender equality. Women, however, are not all the same. We are not a homogenous group. There are women who benefit from existing systems of oppression and who are committed to maintaining their positions, even at significant cost to other women. There are women who do not want to be the woman to make the statement or take the action that demonstrates commitment to gender equality and the advancement of all women, often because it is more comfortable to come close to fitting in (with other leaders and decision-makers, the majority of whom are men).

Feminist advocates know this. This awareness is the source of the clear distinction between “women’s groups” and women who are political aspirants who call for more women in parliament and the feminist advocates who acknowledge the nuances and call for more feminist women and women who support women’s rights in positions of leadership at all levels.

Ahead of the 65th United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) in 2021, stakeholders from across the Caribbean worked together to develop a regional position on the theme, “Women’s full and effective participation and decision-making in public life, as well as the elimination of violence, for achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls.” The conversations had significant focus on women’s political leadership, ways to reach gender parity in frontline politics, and the markers of gender equality in leadership that extend beyond numbers and into outcomes, both for women and girls and for entire countries.

When gender equality and women’s leadership—particularly in the areas of political life and public life—is discussed, people focus almost exclusively on numbers. Just as there are difference among men in positions of leadership, there are differences among women in positions of leadership.

There are differences in beliefs and values, in skills, in leadership practices, in personal and professional interests, and in ideas and vision of success. It is easy for people to make assumptions about women in positions of leadership based on what they think they know. There are many gender stereotypes that are taken to be true, often entirely due to the frequency with which they are stated as though they are facts and the infrequency of them being refuted. Women do not all lead in the same way. Men do not all lead in the same way either. These facts do not necessarily change the longstanding ideas people have about the differences between women and men and what they mean for abilities and outcomes. This is a primary reason for the focus on gender, what it means, what it does not mean, and how it is used to limit opportunities.

Feminist advocates for women’s political leadership know that numbers are important. The call for women’s leadership in public and political life extends beyond women receiving nominations, getting votes, and being elected into office. It is for harmful gender ideology to be eradicated and social norms to change. It is for the creation of an enabling environment for women’s participation and leadership in public and political life. It is for increased positive representation of women in leadership in media. It is for early exposure to policymaking and spaces and processes. It is for the development of opportunities for women and girls to lead and conditions under which leadership by women and girls is supported, celebrated, and normalised.

Regarding the political moment in Trinidad and Tobago, Dr Gabrielle Hosein, lecturer at the Institute for Gender and Development Studies at the University of the West Indies St Augustine’s campus said, “In Trinidad and Tobago’s political history, having three different kinds of women leaders right now is unprecedented and historic.” Importantly, she noted that these wins are symbolic. “We have to see if they lead to ‘substantive’ wins, meaning approaches to governance that are less domineering and antagonistic and more inclusive and transformative, and create greater social, economic and gender justice,” she said.

Feminist advocates hold multiple truths. One is that women have the right to hold positions of leadership and decision-making power, and this is not contingent on any trainings or alignment on sociopolitical issues any more than is the case for men. Another is that the progress we need, particularly on women’s rights, gender equality, and social development, requires the participation and leadership of feminist women and women who are committed to working on achieving these goals, even in the face of great opposition, (from) wherever it rears its head.

This means that, just as many men in leadership are mediocre, women have the right to be mediocre in leadership. Just as men enter frontline politics without training, women can enter frontline politics without training. This, however, is not where the bar must be set. It is discriminatory to hold women to a different (and higher) standard than that to which we hold men, so must set higher expectations for all leaders while acknowledging the importance of increasing women’s representation to reach gender parity. This increases the visibility of women as leaders, demonstrates possibilities to young women and girls, normalises women’s leadership, and makes it possible for more women to take feminist positions not only at the personal level, but professionally, within the walls of parliament, cabinet, and the senate.

 

Published in The Tribune on May 7, 2025.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Importance of community when systems fail

Systems are failing us all the time. These system failures lead to unfavorable conditions. They affect our daily lives. They affect our wellbeing. We have been, however, trained not ignore systems and to focus on the individual. We look for the ways that an individual has done less than their best, or the ways that we ourselves have somehow contribute to the situation we find uncomfortable, dangerous, or otherwise subpar.

We have a tendency to turn on and blame one another for failures rather than being attentive to the ways that systems malfunction or, in as is often the case, successfully degrade, endanger, subjugate, and limit us and our positive life outcomes.

Last week, someone posted in a popular Facebook group about the gates at public elementary schools being closed until eight o’clock in the morning. The person raised the safety issue this causes after a child “decided to jump in front of [their] car” and they slammed on the breaks to avoid hitting the child. They referenced recent events that let us know that there are safety concerns that must be considered with regard to school-age children. The post also included a note about the children failing to listen to the security guard before this change to the gate opening time was made.

The issue the post raised is valid. With the school gate closed until eight o’clock, when teachers are at work, there is a significant amount of time that children are outside of the premises and without supervision. Given the traffic on the road from seven o’clock to nine o’clock in the morning, the eight and nine o’clock start times for far too many jobs, the start time for school, and the inefficiency and safety issues of public transportation, parents are often forced to drop their children to school quite early to ensure that the children get to school on time and they are on time for work.

Somehow, many of the comments ignored the issue the person raised, instead casting blame on parents. Numerous people suggested that parents think it is someone else’s responsibility to supervise their children outside of school hours. Some referenced the disrespect and rudeness of children and the need for parents to better train and discipline their children. Others pointed out the school is not for babysitting children. A few noted that the eight o’clock opening of the gate is a Ministry of Education policy. These may all be interesting points that can explored further. The issue that remains is the inability of many parents to take their children to school at a later time or wait at the school until the gate opens. The options may be for children to miss school or to be there early, before the gate is open.

It a quite common for people to respond to systemic issues by imposing a set of rules or practices, however unrealistic, on individuals. There are sometimes ways that we can improve our lives and make more options available to ourselves, but we cannot bootstrap ourselves out of poverty and the same is true for other conditions that extend beyond our personal capacity to change.

There are many who cannot afford a one-bedroom apartment, not because they are unemployed, inept, or lazy, but because minimum wage is not enough money to live independently. People who are employed and unhoused do not need to be told to get jobs. They have jobs, and the problem is both the rate of pay and the incompatibility of the rate of pay with the actual cost of living. Reducing homelessness does not necessarily require job creation or helping people to find jobs, though this may be helpful for some. It requires a completely different approach to the remuneration of employees and the social services that should support people who are not paid enough to meet their basic needs. A shelter for unhoused people would be a great initiative, and it would not solve the problem. It makes for a good temporary measure while systemic changes are made.

In the case of the school gate opening at eight o’clock and the resulting situation of children being unsupervised and unsafe early in the morning, it may be useful for parents, administrations, teachers, and community members to get together and find a way to create a safe environment for the children who must be taken to school early. Opening the gate and having security to ensure only children and staff gain access may be considered ideal. Others may think there should be a “holding place” for the children before the gate opens, but this still requires adult supervision. We can think of many ways to address this issue on site, but the root of the issue would still be there. There is a system that needs to change.

School hours and work hours are not harmonised, and employers are not responsive to the needs of employees who are full human beings—not just staff, but have other responsibilities as family members and friends.

The 9-to-5 and 8-to-4 work schedule has taken root and become the standard, even in a country that is heavily dependent on the tourism industry (which requires shift work) along with other service industries. Many administrative job functions do not need to be performed during specific hours. Many businesses and customers would benefit from different open hours. There are numerous adjustments that can be made.

While New Providence is not growing in size, the number of cars on the road seem to keep increasing. Traffic is a mess almost all day, every day. It takes far too long to get from one place to another, all because of the number of cars on the road at any given time (and the ways they are driven). This can be alleviated with adjustments to the work day and overall flexibility in work schedules. Everyone does not need to be at work at eight or nine in the morning. Some can begin work at ten or eleven o’clock. We can go into detail about the ways this could benefit businesses, but it is really enough to recognise the benefits to workers and their families. That, on its own, is important, but it is not reflected in workplace practices because the priority is profit. That is the rule of capitalism, of course, yet we are all living in the world, living in this country, where we could all benefit from a better ecosystem, and that begins with support for families.

What needs to change with regard to the rights of workers? What do employers need to do differently? How can we make it possible for people to be as high-performing in their families as they are on their jobs? What have we accepted as normal or standard that need not be? How can we train ourselves to think beyond the individual, resist the urge to cast blame, and set about creating solutions that can be applied at the systemic level, for the benefit of all?

As we continue to navigate the challenges of a world that is unchanging in many ways, yet changing in ways that terrify and terrorize many, it is important that we remember the importance of community. We have a responsibility to be attentive, not only to individual and familial needs, but to the needs of the collective. We, as community members, need to actively care for one another, understanding the value of human life and the necessity of combining our efforts to assess problems, create solutions, and advocate for systemic change that is the responsibility of the people we elected to represent us.

National Poetry Month

April is National Poetry Month, so it is a good time to revisit favorite poems, pick up a book of poetry, or even put pen to paper to write a poem or two. To join the people participating in National Poetry Writing Month, send a message to Poinciana Paper Press on Facebook or Instagram to request an add to the WhatsApp group. The group will write a collective poem at Sovereign, the exhibition open at Poinciana Paper Press on Wednesday, April 9, at 6pm, and those in New Providence will meet at the National Art Gallery of The Bahamas on Sunday, April 13, at 2pm for a field trip that includes a look at this year’s National Exhibition and writing together.

“For Nothing Is Fixed” by James Baldwin

For nothing is fixed,

forever, forever, forever,

it is not fixed;

the earth is always shifting,

the light is always changing,

the sea does not cease to grind down rock.

Generations do not cease to be born,

and we are responsible to them

because we are the only witnesses they have.

The sea rises, the light fails,

lovers cling to each other,

and children cling to us.

The moment we cease to hold each other,

the moment we break faith with one another,

the sea engulfs us and the light goes out.

Published in The Tribune on April 9, 2025.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

The International Women’s Day march is over. Now, what’s being done on the issues?

International Women’s Day has, once again, come and gone. It is still Women’s History Month, however, and this is a good time to look at the progress made on women’s rights and be attentive to the persisting issues and what each and every person can and must do to affect change. Advocates, non-governmental organisations, and members of the public look to the government to make necessary changes to laws and policies in order to eliminate gender-based violence against women and combat gender-based discrimination. Businesses, though, are not often thought of or called upon to do their part.

Most of us spend our most valuable time at work and the workplace shapes our lives, both by what it demands of us, what it exposes us to, and the constraints it imposes on our lives. We must, then, look to employers to see us all as human beings, recognised that we have full lives, face the ways they contribute to gender inequality, and make adjustments so that that workplaces are not only productive, but responsive to the needs of the employees who keep them running.

Here are four policies that businesses need to adopt rather than waiting for the government take action and force the changes across the board:

1. Sexual Harassment Policy.

In 2025, there should be no business that does not have a sexual harassment policy. Even small businesses need to have human resource manuals and employee handbooks that acknowledge sexual harassment as a form of workplace discrimination, explains what it is and the forms it takes, and explicitly states that it will not be tolerate. There must be a clearly articulated procedure for reporting sexual harassment and handling the complaint.

2. Provide expanded parental leave.

The law currently allows for 13 weeks of maternity leave. There is no leave for fathers. These are both issues which become obvious when one becomes a parent and faces the reality of the healing process for mothers and the bonding that needs to happen with both mothers and fathers. Employers do not need to wait for law to make the necessary changes. Some companies have already taken small steps by providing paid leave to fathers, though the leave period is quite short. Both parents need time at home with their newborn. The birthing parents experiences pain, discomfort, and difficulty moving on her own, so she often requires assistances. The other parent needs to be present to provide that support and to participate in the care of the newborn.

Women face consequences of maternity leave when they return to work. It is not limited to people referring to this health leave as “vacation” or having bad attitudes due to the change in workload or dynamics during the mother’s absence, but includes the complete exclusion from opportunities for growth and promotion as people make decisions for her because she is a mother “can’t” do certain things like work late or travel for work. When men have leave, it helps to level the field in multiple ways. It challenges the idea that women are solely responsible for childcare, it gives men the opportunity to learn about and participate childcare alongside the women, and it combats the gender discrimination at work with both men and women benefitting from leave and face the reality of returning to work.

3. Implement C190 and R206.

The Bahamas ratified the International Labor Organization’s Convention 190 (C190) on Eliminating Violence and Harassment in the World of Work in November 2022. While the International Organization allows one year from the date of ratification for its Conventions to come into force, C190 has yet to be implemented.

Convention 190 defines the world of work broadly, extending beyond what may usually be considered the office, store, worksite, or other distinct area in which work is undertaken. Article 3 says:

“This Convention applies to violence and harassment in the world of work occurring in the course of, linked with or arising out of work:

(a) in the workplace, including public and private spaces where they are a place of work;

(b) in places where the worker is paid, takes a rest break or a meal, or uses sanitary, washing and changing facilities;

(c) during work-related trips, travel, training, events or social activities;

(d) through work-related communications, including those enabled by information and communication technologies;

(e) in employer-provided accommodation; and

(f) when commuting to and from work.”

Employers have a responsibility to create and maintain work environments that are free of harassment and violence. Recommendation 206 (R206), which accompanies C190 is an excellent place for employers to start as it includes the concrete actions that can be taken toward to the elimination of violence and harassment in the world of work.

It states, for example, that workplace policy should:

(a) state that violence and harassment will not be tolerated;

(b) establish violence and harassment prevention programmes with, if appropriate, measurable objectives;

(c) specify the rights and responsibilities of the workers and the employer;

(d) contain information on complaint and investigation procedures;

(e) provide that all internal and external communications related to incidents of violence and harassment will be duly considered, and acted upon as appropriate;

(f) specify the right to privacy of individuals and confidentiality, as referred to in Article 10(c) of the Convention, while balancing the right of workers to be made aware of all hazards; and

(g) include measures to protect complainants, victims, witnesses and whistle-blowers against victimisation or retaliation.

4. Flexible working hours.

While most people have to work full time in order to meet basic needs, there are demands beyond the workplace because we all live more full, complex lives than robots designed to produce, produce, produce. By law, all children of school age must be enrolled in and attend school. They need to be transported to and from school and, in many cases, this requires the involvement of at least one adult who has the use of a car or can accompany them by bus. This is the safest option for children who are young, small, impressionable, sexualised, and at-risk of harm at the hands of adult predators. Being an employee and being a parent are not mutually exclusive. Many parents have to leave work during the work day to collect their children from school and take them home or to another place where it is expected that they will be supervised and remain safe. The eight-hour work day with one hour break does not accommodate this specific, common need.

Many parents use their lunch hours for school pickup. This has become a norm, but it is not acceptable. It means a large proportion of employees do not have time to eat lunch — necessary for the physical health and cognitive function — or to take care of themselves in other ways, including having a break from their tasks. In addition, with most schools ending the day at the same time, causing an increase in traffic on the road, one hour is not sufficient. Not only would it be helpful to allow for flexible work hours, but it would be beneficial to make allowances for more flexible work structure and location, including the option to work from home. Working from home for part of the day — for example, from 1pm  to 5pm — or two to three days per week can assist employees in making the most of their work days while attending to their personal and familial needs. This also contributes to wellbeing in the workplace.

By extending these options to all employees, employers make it possible for fathers to be more full participants in the lives of their children by meeting one of their practical needs. When both mothers and fathers do the school run, there is less distinction between mothers and fathers which can lead to the end of stigma against mothers who are judged and punished for being mothers and having certain responsibilities laid at their feet with no support from fathers who are left to excel at work.

Gender-based violence against women and gender inequality are linked. Ending violence against women and achieving gender equality require the same kinds and levels of work. We are saddled with one lousy government administration after another, and we have to make our demands more consistently and loudly with every general election, and employers are left to do the bare minimum. This has to change. We must continue to pressure the government, and we must demand more of employers. The cost of treating employees like human beings can not be accepted as an excuse for inhumane practices and failures to adjust to the changing reality and the knowledge we gain which should result in change. Any business that cannot afford to implement policies and programs that reduce and eventually eradicate gender-based violence and discrimination cannot afford to be in business. They need to crunch the numbers and figure it out. Workers are not just means of production. Workers are people, with human needs and human rights. Employers need to step up and take action, even as the government fails to lead the way.

Published in The Tribune on March 12, 2025.

/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

‘Rape is rape’, except in our laws it isn’t

“Prime” describes minister. Every minister is not the prime minister. The prime minister is a specific type of minister. We can talk about minister in general, and we can acknowledge that different ministers are treated differently. In particular, the prime minister is quite different from other ministers given the specific aspects of the position that other ministers do not have.

In “curry chicken,” curry describes chicken. Every chicken dish is not curry chicken. We can talk about chicken dishes generally and at length, and we can acknowledge that all chicken dishes are not exactly the same. There are numerous chicken dishes that, for example, contain tomatoes. There are some that do not necessarily have tomatoes. Each variety of chicken dishes is distinct, though a part of this general group.

Adjectives are used to make a distinction between nouns that may otherwise be groups together and could be inappropriately treated as the same. Sometimes the adjectives are used for harmful division, causing difference in treatment that are discriminatory and lead to violent outcomes. Many adjectives are used to describe and mark difference between women who are, otherwise, all a part of one group. There are black women, working class women, migrant women, and married women. These are all women, and each subgroup, with the adjective adding description, has shared experiences that are different from those of other subgroups.

Married women share some experiences with unmarried woman because of their share womanhood, but some experiences are specific to married women. In fact, marriage comes with consequences for women, and this is why we have to talk about marital. It is the exclusion of spouses—married people—from the definition of rape in the Sexual Offences Act that makes it necessary for us to talk about marital rape when we should be able to talk about rape without the descriptor.

Why does the prime minister have a problem with describing rape?

There is actually a better question. Does the prime minister actually care about describing rape and the reason the term “marital rape” is being used? Use of this term is not without reason. It is a result of the fact that the Sexual Offences Act currently excludes married people from the definition of rape. One spouse can rape the other without legal consequence due to the exclusion, through “who is not his spouse” at the end of the definition of rape in Section 3 of the Sexual Offenses Act. “Marital rape”, then, is a term we use to talk about the specific act of sexual violence that the law not only does not address, but explicitly communicates disinterest and inaction with regard to it. The term “marital rape” is only used because the law has separated rape of a spouse by a spouse from every other rape.

To complain about “describing rape,” knowing the legal context and importance of advocacy—with precise language—to criminalise it is ridiculous. Unless we are to believe the prime minister is not particularly intelligent and passed the bar by a fluke, we can only read this nonsense opposition to the use of the term—which we need in order to address this issue—as disingenuous and especially disrespectful to the affected people and the people advocating for legal reform to make the use of the term unnecessary.

Women’s right organisations and advocates have not asked for rape to be “described”. In fact, we have clearly stated that there is no type of rape or descriptor of rape that makes it better or worse. There is rape by strangers. There is rape that occurs on dates. There is rape that is perpetrated by multiple people. There is rape that is connected to hatred of LGBTQI+ people. There is rape perpetrated by family members. There is rape that is facilitated by drugs. Yes, there is marital rape. Yes, rape is rape. The law, however, does not reflect these truths.

This is not the first time the prime minister has spewed this nonsense about marital rape and his personal dislike for the term. He made the same comment in April 2024. It is as absurd this year as it was last year. There is no need to consult on the issue, especially when the prime minister has stated that “rape is rape”. What is there to discuss or debate? Get rid of the categories of rape. Make the “descriptions” of rape useless.

Here is a one-step guide to getting rid of “marital rape” as a descriptor of rape: Criminalise marital rape by amending Section 3 of the Sexual Offences Act to remove “who is not his spouse” so that the marital exception is not in the law and all rape becomes illegal, regardless of any relationship that may exist between the perpetrator and the survivor or victim. The #Strike5ive campaign by Equality Bahamas clearly states additional amendments to make it strong, explicit, and free of loopholes.

Recommendations

1. Join Feminist Book Club in reading What Happened to Belén by Ana Elena Correa in March. Ana Elena Correa is a lawyer, journalist, and women’s rights activist in Argentina and this book is about Belén, a 25-year-old woman who did not know that she was pregnant and had a miscarriage. Doctors reported her to the authorities and she was imprisoned. This sparked the #niunamas—not one more—feminist movement which led to the decriminalisation of abortion in Argentina in 2021. Literary Hub said, “Ana Correa poignantly recounts how so many systems failed Belén, the movement that sprung to action to free her… an essential read detailing the harms created by police in healthcare settings, abortion stigma, and the criminalization of pregnancy outcomes whether it’s in Argentina or the United States of America.”

2. Plan to participate in the International Women’s Day March + Expo hosted by Equality Bahamas. The annual event will begin at the Eastern Parade (lawn east of Scotiabank on East Bay, accessible by vehicular traffic from Dowdeswell Street) at 8:45am when participants will gather for the march to The Dundas grounds on Mackey Street. Upon arrival at The Dundas, the International Women’s Day Expo will open with Zumba with Ms. Deidree followed by concurrents sessions including poetry writing, salsa dancing, and yoga, a dedicated space for art by Sixty 2 Sixty Art Gallery, a fun zone for children by Sustainable Me Summer Camp, and nongovernmental organizations including Bahamas Crisis Centre, The Dignified Girl Project, and Hands for Hunger. It is a great place to spend the day with family, friends, and new people and to engage in fun activities without having to spend money on site.

Published in The Tribune on February 19, 2025.

/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

We agreed to protect women – why don’t we?

THE Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women, also known as the Belém do Pará Convention was adopted on June 9, 1994. Belém do Pará is now 30 years old and has been ratified by 32 of the 34 member states of the Organization of American States (OAS). The Bahamas ratified the Convention, obligating it to prevent, investigate, and punish violence against women.

In Article 1, Belém do Pará defines violence against women as “any act or conduct, based on gender, which causes death or physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, whether in the public or the private sphere”. In Article 2, it elaborates with the specific inclusion of violence that “occurs within the family or domestic unit or within any other interpersonal relationship, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence with the woman”, “occurs in the community and is perpetrated by any person” including harassment in the workplace and other institutions, and “is perpetrated or condoned by the state or its agents regardless of where it occurs”.

In addition to the specific mention of the public and private spheres in Article 1, Article 3 specifically states the right of every woman to be free from violence in both the public and private spheres. Article 3 also draws attention to State-condoned violence and, in the Bahamian context, makes it necessary to look at laws that discriminate against women and exclude particular acts of violence or perpetrators of violence.

Articles 1 to 3 are easily applied to the issue of marital rape in The Bahamas and the flimsy excuses put forward by successive governments and anti-rights groups who insist, implicitly, that women are not full human beings and there should be exceptions when violence is perpetrated at home and by spouses. Violence against women is clearly defined, and the Convention explicitly states, twice, that women have the right to be free from violence in the public and private spheres, and perpetrated by any person. This means states are obligated to prevent, investigate, and punish violence enacted against women in the home and violence enacted against women by their spouses.

Articles 7 to 9 are specific to the duties of State Parties. These include their obligation to:

1. apply due diligence to prevent, investigate and impose penalties for violence against women

2. include in their domestic legislation penal, civil, administrative and any other type of provisions that may be needed to prevent, punish and eradicate violence against women and to adopt appropriate administrative measures where necessary (This includes the gender-based violence bill, recommended by the CEDAW Committee in 2018 and by member states in the Universal Periodic Review process in 2023. The government committed to pass the bill, but stopped consultation, abandoned the bill, and passed the “Protection Against Violence” Act which does not, in any way, address the specific issue of gender-based violence.)

3. take all appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to amend or repeal existing laws and regulations or to modify legal or customary practices which sustain the persistence and tolerance of violence against women (This includes the amendments to the Sexual Offences Act, removing “who is not his spouse” from the definition of rape, repealing section 15 on “sexual assault by spouse”, adding a statutory definition of consent, and adding a clause of non-immunity on the basis of marriage.)

4. promote awareness and observance of the right of women to be free from violence, and the right of women to have their human rights respected and protected (The CEDAW Committee has recommended that the government ensure that women and girls are aware of their human rights, particularly under the Convention, and there has been no movement toward this in the five years since.)

5. modify social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, including the development of formal and informal educational programs appropriate to every level of the educational process, to counteract prejudices, customs and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or superiority of either of the sexes or on the stereotyped roles for men and women which legitimise or exacerbate violence against women (Related to the previous point, there is no plan and there has certainly been no action by the government to address the issue of gender stereotyping and harmful ideology. This, too, is an obligation through CEDAW, and one that is critical to preventing violence against women and girls.)

6. to ensure research and the gathering of statistics and other relevant information relating to the causes, consequences and frequency of violence against women, in order to assess the effectiveness of measures to prevent, punish and eradicate violence against women and to formulate and implement the necessary changes (The gender-based violence, which was never passed, should have included a system for recording and analysing incidents of violence against women and, in particular, femicide, in order to identify risk factors and trends which would aid in developing effective prevention and intervention.)

The Belém do Pará is not often discussed in The Bahamas. We have generally been more attentive to the United Nations human rights mechanisms. While they are useful, it is important that we make better use of regional mechanisms and find ways to learn from other countries in the region that have had success in reducing violence against women and in implementing the Convention in effective ways.

That 30 years have passed since The Bahamas ratified the Convention and few people recognise its name, much less know what it is about and what it contains is a failure of successive government administrations. It is, as we know, not enough to participate in multilateral processes, sign and ratify documents, make commitments, and occasionally report. The general public needs to be made aware of the obligations of the government to protect and expand our human rights. We need to know our rights and how to access them. We need to have a clear understanding of the existing national legislation and how it is contravention with international commitments. We, importantly, need to know that these commitments are to us, and not to an institution. The institutions are vessels and, yes, motivators, and we, the people, are rights holders. It is our right to know our rights, and it is the obligation of the government to ensure that we know them and access them fully.

Published in The Tribune on June 12, 2024.

/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

Bahamian politics a race to the bottom

It looks like we are in for another race to the bottom. We are now halfway through this term, and the Free National Movement will decide who its leader will be in the coming weeks. While the two candidates, from what we have seen thus far, are quite different, neither inspires confidence. The party itself has a significant amount of work ahead of it to define itself and prove itself to a new generation of voters and the voters who refused to show up for it in 2021. Two and a half years later, this work has not even begun. In fact, it seems to be working against itself. It is not even trying to play the role of Opposition, failing to draw attention to the governance failures, failing to offer solutions, and failing to model better practices.

Member of Parliament for St. Anne’s seemed to be upset by the announcement that The Bahamas now recognises Palestine as a state. The Bahamas took far too long to take this step, particularly as we witness, on a daily basis, the settler colonialism and genocide, by Israel, of Palestine and the Palestinian people. The Bahamas was the last CARICOM country to recognise Palestine as a state, and this is an embarrassment. White has now added to the embarrassment by his weak attempt to challenge it, and using “traditional allies” to do it. He said, “Our traditional allies, Madam Speaker, are countries that we haven’t aligned our position with, and I find that on such an important international issue, now it’s a national issue.”

The genocide of the Palestinian people has been an issue at the international, regional, and national levels for years, and without recognition of the same. As stated in the Caribbean Feminist Statement Against Israel’s Settle Colonial Project and Ongoing Genocide in Palestine, “We, Caribbean people, who have arisen from histories of genocide, enslavement, indentureship, and colonialism, remain firm and unwavering against all attempts at settler colonialism, apartheid, arbitrary arrests and detention, displacement and forced exile, confiscation of land and territories, sexual violence, and other human rights violations carried out by any State against any ethnic, racial, or geographic population. These images of violence are all too familiar.”

Over the past 228 days, we have seen the displacement of over 900,000 people from Gaza. We have seen the destruction of schools, mosques, and hospitals. We have watched as journalists report on the conditions with the eery sound of weapons flying overhead. We have read about the hunger, seen the images of injuries and death, and heard the cracks in the voices of thousands of people who continue to speak against the violence they are experiencing without end and call on us, the rest of the world, whoever our allies may be, to help them.

When we, human rights advocates, call on the government to fulfill its obligation to protect, promote, and ensure access to human rights, there is talk of “sovereignty.” When we reference the United Nations human rights mechanisms that The Bahamas has voluntarily adopted and ratified, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), “sovereignty” comes up. When the United States Embassy flies the PRIDE flag at its locations, “sovereignty” is thrown around. For some reason, though, when it comes to The Bahamas taking a principled position — the right position — on the statehood of Palestine, it is time for The Bahamas to worry about its allies and their wishes. Why might that be? There are far too many people in positions of leadership who are ill-equipped, unprepared, and generally opposed to human rights, regardless of sovereignty or allyship. It seems, in fact, that they are playing a game that has nothing to do with the wellbeing of the people they claim to serve.

White said, “[…] the people of this nation, Madam Speaker, should be informed I think on a more regular basis on why some of these international decisions are being made, why we are agreeing one way or the other.”

He said this about the decision by The Bahamas to recognize Palestine as a state. He did not say this about countless other decisions made by the Government of The Bahamas with no announcement at all. There are no questions about the financial bills that are pushed through quickly and without consultation. There are no questions about the way The Bahamas votes at the United Nations on a regular basis. There are no questions about participation in InterAmerican processes or the decisions made therein. The continued failure of government officials to disclose assets is not a conversation this week. Why might that be?

Several human rights advocates have been calling on the government to communicate with the general public about its commitments and activities in international spaces. In fact, we have used international spaces and processes to demand that the government inform the Bahamian people of its commitments and to make human rights mechanisms accessible to the public. When we talk about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it should not be a cloudy concept for the general public, but a clear set of rights that we all can easily apply to their own lives, even if we cannot perfectly recite them. When we reference CEDAW, it should not evoke fear. When we remind the country that migrants are human beings with human rights, it should not be surprising or confusing. Perhaps successive administrations have enjoyed the low access to information for the general public which enables them to distract, to lie, and to create enemies of human beings rather than the inequitable systems we live within. Migrant people have always been scapegoats of choice, haven’t they?

It is no surprise that Minnis is not only running for leadership of the Free National Movement again, but that he is so easily and confidently referencing his spectacular failure from 2017 to 2021 — which even he was in a rush to escape with a nonsensically early general election — saying “Let’s do it again,” is a sure sign of delusion or confidence that, in a race to the bottom, he is a good bet.

Rather than focusing on the state of the country, largely due to his egotistical, sloppy, tyrannical “leadership” and the current administration that is taking full advantage of the terrible precedent set in many areas, including undisguised abhorrence for the press, he has taken aim at some of the most vulnerable people in the country. Instead of acknowledging the harm already done by terrible decisions and devastating inaction, he is going the lazy route of scapegoating Haitian migrants. He said that he would “aggressively deport all undocumented people” and claimed he would regularize those who have been in The Bahamas for a long time. These two promises are not aligned. The first is, in fact, quite troubling when we should know what is happening right now in Haiti. (It is important that we do not pretend that he was talking about all migrants. He meant, as they always mean, Haitian migrants).

Pintard, on the other hand, said the Free National Movement should not “make every immigrant a tyrant”. He pointed to willingness to collaborate and a duty to solve problems. It is cause for concern that these conversations do not seem to be taking place within the party and, importantly, across the obvious factions. Is there no clear direction for the party? No shared values? No clarity on what leadership means and looks like in practice?

We have not seen strong leadership from Pintard who has been in the ideal position to demonstrate his ability over the past few years. The current Opposition has fallen into the same practices as every Opposition before it, opposing for the sake of it, criticizing at every turn, and offering no solutions. It is old, it is tired, it is ineffective, and it serves no one. This is unfortunate, not only for a party that is vying for leadership in the next general election, but for the people of The Bahamas who need a true, properly functioning Opposition.

Anyone who is serious about leading a political party, not to mention leading a country, must demonstrate their values. These are not centering hatred of people or particular groups of people. Values are indicative of positions on pressing issues. People who are serious about leadership are clear in their positions. If they cannot decide for themselves, they certainly cannot be trusted to listen to and make decisions in the best interest of others. When will the Progressive Liberal Party and the Free National Movement figure out who they are and where they stand on critical issues? How will they communicate their identities to us? What will it take for them to be truly people-centred? Who, within these parties, are leaders with the competence to listen, learn, collaborate, communicate, and act with the most vulnerable in mind? If it takes anywhere near two more years to see manifestos and charters, we need to be clear that there are no leaders in these parties, and there are no parties prepared to lead.

Published in The Tribune on May 22, 2024.

/0 Comments/by
, ,

The Network of Caribbean Feminists Statement on Palestine

The Network of Caribbean Feminists released its statement–calling on CARICOM to support the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel) case at the International Court of Justice for measures to be taken against genocidal actions by Israel–on the ongoing genocide in Palestine on Monday, May 7. This post has excerpts from the statement.

“We affirm the humanity and dignity of the Palestinian people and we rebuke the violence enacted against them, including bombardment, starvation, sexual violence, ethnic cleansing, and the intentional destruction of educational, cultural, healthcare, political, and religious institutions. More than 35,000 Palestinian people have been killed since October 7, 2023. Most of them are women and children. More than 80,000 Palestinian people have been injured. Over 8,000 Palestinian people are missing. Almost 2 million Palestinians are currently displaced in Gaza, and 1.1 million are facing catastrophic food insecurity.”

“We reiterate the Human Rights Council resolution on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination which “calls upon all States to ensure their obligations of non-recognition, non-aid or assistance with regard to the serious breaches of peremptory norms of international law by Israel.” We grieve the Nakba of 1948 and support Palestinians who reject the two-state solution. There can be no peace without justice.”

See and share the full statement at tiny.cc/caribbeanforpalestine

/0 Comments/by