PRIME MINISTER Perry Christie is sticking to his story — his government was elected on May 7 “on the basis that we would move to acquire the majority interest” of Bahamas Telecommunications Company from its new owners, Cable and Wireless.

It is true that there were union protests in the late nineties when the sale of BaTelCo was first proposed. At a 1997 rally Prime Minister Ingraham explained that neither government, nor BaTelCo on its own could keep up with the technological advances in telecommunications. The backwardness of BaTelCo was indeed hampering the development of e-commerce and retarding the commercial growth of the country.

The main thrust of some of the unionists was that BaTelCo staff should be allowed to take over the company. Having shown no ability to successfully direct such an enterprise while it had been in their hands for so long, there were few who were prepared to give that suggestion serious consideration.

“We are faced with the stark reality that the nature of the workplace is changing and changing rapidly, fueled principally by the dynamic advances in telecommunications technology,” Deputy Prime Minister Frank Watson told them, adding that it was government’s “duty to ensure that the Bahamas is prepared for the challenges that lie ahead.”

But after the downsizing of BaTelCo staff and the distribution of separation packages to those who chose to leave, at least one union leader, who had loudly protested the privatisation process now said that BCPOU members were “eagerly” awaiting the sale of BaTelCo because their lives had been “up in the air.” He then conceded: “The sale of BaTelCo will bring about better services to the public and employees.”

Therefore, we find it difficult to believe that the question of the ownership of BTC was the turning point in the election of the PLP government. We do not recall Mr Christie pushing the cause of BTC while on the campaign trail. It is true that the PLP produced a 200-page document outlining its Charter for Governance, but that was released at such a late date that we doubt anyone had time to read it before going to the polls. And if they had, it is questionable whether, what the Greenberg Quinlan Rosner election report classified as the party’s base support – “those with less than a high school education.”— would have bothered to even turn the first page. So unless the nationalisation of BTC was in that report, we do not recall it being mentioned at the various PLP rallies. However, what the PLP did highlight at the rallies were crime, education, healthcare, mortgage relief, border patrol, job creation, gambling, financial services, reduction of the cost of electricity, taxes and Grand Bahama’s economy. Mr Christie gave his government 100 days from its election on May 7 to deal with those matters. We must remind the PLP government that they have hardly touched the list — yet there is only a few more days left in their 100-day challenge.

It is our belief that the average Bahamian — especially PLP supporters — are far more interested in reduction in crime, job creation and their mortgages than dropped calls by BTC cell phones. We might remind the PLP that dropped calls while Cable & Wireless is trying to rebuild a badly operated company is nothing to what Bahamians had to endure when BaTelCo was BaTelCo and in the hands of politicians and unionists. So we do not accept that Mr Christie got the mandate from anyone — except possibly his own political colleagues — to take issue with Cable & Wireless over majority ownership.

At a press conference yesterday Mr Christie seemed peeved that Moody’s, rather than talking to a reporter, had not consulted with him over their concerns about the proposed renationalisation of BTC. It must be pointed out that Moody’s did not go to a newspaper to express its complaints. However, when a newspaper went to it, it freely explained its concerns for the people of this country. This is more than Mr Christie has done. He should explain to Bahamians the proposals he plans to put to C&W and clearly say how in the end Bahamians will be better off — in their pockets — not in their nationalistic emotions with owning BTC.

Moody’s quite rightly is concerned how government will fund its already unmanageable debt, and whether in fact the government has public support for the BTC venture. Moody’s fears government is not taking seriously the urgent need to reduce the nation’s debt.

It pointed to the further downgrading by Moody’s of the government of Belize— which had nationalised its electricity and telecommunications companies. Moody’s said that the “downgrade reflects the governments deteriorating capacity and willingness to service its external debts as well as Moody’s assessment of investor losses in the event of a debt restructuring.”

The June 4th edition of The Belize Times described the downgrade in these terms:

“Belize’s economy under the Barrow Administration’s control, has been on a steady, one-way, down-spiral course. This was confirmed once more by the bad news that the nation’s debt rating had been downgraded again by Moody’s credit rating agency.”

The answer given by Moody’s representative to a Nassau reporter was just a friendly warning to Bahamians to make certain that by following the Christie plan they too, like Belize, are not about to take a down-ward spiral to financial disaster.