Bahamians are pressing The Tribune for more investigative reporting — it is felt that only half the story is being told in this country. We disagree. The truth is that in certain areas only a quarter of the story is being told. However, until the Bahamas enacts a Freedom of Information Act, the Bahamian people will always be half informed.
The Tribune does its best, but if the public only knew how hard it is to squeeze information out of certain quarters, they would credit our staff with doing an outstanding job.
For example, something as simple as a pile of sand that suddenly appeared one day on the Montagu foreshore, squeezed between two houses just west of Dick’s Point, has grown into a closed-mouthed mystery. Dredging was also going on, and obviously whoever was responsible for both the dredging and the mountain of sand was hiding nothing, indicating that he had permission from someone in authority to do what he was doing. When residents in the area complained and The Tribune started probing, the dredging stopped, workmen disappeared, but the mound of sand remains waiting for the first hurricane to smother neighbouring properties.
Someone must have applied for a licence to proceed with whatever plans the developer had in mind, and someone in authority must have issued a permit for the work to be carried out. But when Tribune reporters tried to get information about what was going on, who issued the permits, who eventually stopped the work, and a date for the removal of the sand, they ran into a blank wall. And on that wall sat three monkeys. Their names were: Sees Nothing, Speaks Nothing and Hears Nothing. And so, thanks to the silence of the monkeys, The Tribune has nothing to report. But the sand is still there.
Residents in the area believe The Tribune has let them down. To them we say: Support us in what is now going to be a fight for a Freedom of Information Act. The people have a right to know. At his mini-rally this week Prime Minister Christie reminded his ministers that the people were their masters and that they were the people’s servants. Parliamentarians should not forget this.
We can recall many instances of the “closed-mouth-catch-no flies” attitude among civil servants who former prime minister Ingraham ordered to be open with the press when his party became the government in 1992. After 10 years of openness, we are slipping back to the Pindling era, a time when “no comment” was the reflex response by civil servants to Tribune reporters even before a question was asked.
It’s a dangerous attitude when a government information officer thinks that a treaty between governments might not be for public consumption. However, that was the answer a Tribune reporter received when he asked a government information officer for the Bahamas-Cuba agreement, which was the crux of the matter in the recent detention of the Cuban dentists. The Tribune got the agreement, but not from the Bahamas government.
Only this week The Tribune faced the same blank wall when it asked questions on behalf of the public about the awarding of contracts by the Ministry of Housing.
This is public information. Why the secrecy? We have been told that “an unusually large proportion of government housing projects has been awarded to a preferred group of contractors.” True or false?
We remember the days – in the UBP era – when The Tribune published such information on a regular basis. It was as regular as the timetable that we used to publish on the sailing of the mailboats and the produce coming into the Produce Exchange.
But today, oh no, the hatches have been nailed down. Today, if we want these records, we have to put our requests in writing. And then that request has to be cleared by the Minister or his Permanent Secretary.
Our reporters are complaining that they find themselves writing more requests to various departments for permission to get information than they are now writing news for our readers. This undoubtedly is an exaggeration, but they are trying to emphasise a serious problem in news gathering.
All contracts awarded by the Housing Ministry come before the tenders board, and the names of those tendering are a matter of public record. However, there are some contracts, which because they fall below the maximum level do not have to go to the tenders board. It is alleged that some large contracts, which because of their value would have to go to the board, are being broken up to get them under the line. Members of the public are claiming favouritism in the department. As their tax money pays these contractors they are entitled to know.
Montagu MP Brent Symonette, who heads the Public Accounts Committee, said he also has asked for a list of all persons who have received contracts to build low cost homes.
“For four years, in Parliament, l have asked for that information, and they have not answered me yet,” said Mr Symonette.
We recall that when in Opposition, Minister Bradley Roberts, who was then on the Public Accounts Committee, asked for the school building contracts under the FNM. They were made available.
If the FNM could do it, what’s wrong with the PLP?
Is there in fact something to hide?
Editorial from The Tribune
