ON THE day that we should have been behind our desk or watching TV 13, we were at a morning meeting and so did not hear or see former prime minister Hubert Ingraham’s final farewell from front-line politics. Although Mr Ingraham did not have his day in an official meeting of the House of Assembly, he did say farewell from the Opposition’s committee room of a parliament from which he served his country faithfully for 35 years. Yesterday was the anniversary of his swearing-in as a member of that chamber. For 15 of those years, Mr Ingraham served as prime minister of the Bahamas.

Although, described as a protégé of the late Sir Lynden Pindling, almost from the beginning he was spotted as a politician, who, for the sake of politics, would not betray his conscience – not even for his mentor. He first showed his true mettle when as chairman of a Select Committee on Influence Peddling he refused to white wash the sins of his government — at that time the PLP. From that day on we watched him carefully, knowing that if he kept on his independent course, his days as a PLP party member were numbered. In fact in those days he was the only member of the PLP that The Tribune could have supported with a clear conscience. The late Sir Etienne Dupuch marked him down as a young politician to watch. Sir Etienne felt he was the only one who had the potential to reach the top — and what mattered most, do it with integrity.

In 1982 Mr Ingraham was appointed Housing and National Insurance Minister, but his term was short lived. After two years he got the “order of the boot” for criticising his party’s inaction after the damaging findings of a 1984 Commission of Inquiry into drug smuggling. Mr Ingraham believed — and had the temerity to say so — that there should be an investigation – “let the chips fall where they may,” he had said. The “chips” certainly did fall, but not where they should have. In 1986 he was dismissed from Cabinet and in 1986 expelled from the PLP.

They were hard years, but, as far as his political career was concerned they were his best years. He— with now Prime Minister Perry Christie, his former law partner, who had also fallen from grace — decided to go it alone. They were the first politicians, who as independents, won their seats in the House without the backing of a party. The difference between them, however, was that Mr Christie returned to his party. Mr Ingraham did not. Mr Ingraham’s conscience prevented him from retracing his steps backwards. He later joined the FNM and led it to victory in 1992. In 1997 he again led the FNM to victory – despite Sir Lynden’s prediction that he would be only a one-term prime minister. This time it was a landslide victory. After that loss, Sir Lynden, having governed for 25 consecutive years, disappeared quietly into retirement.

We gather from the reports we received yesterday that Mr Ingraham announced his August 30th retirement with brilliance.

“He was great,” said one caller. “He shows that he is still the leader — no one can touch him, he is a political giant among pygmies.” He is the man needed at this critical hour, said another, “he was brilliant, it was exciting — there is no one who can come near to matching him.”

We have heard so many glowing reports that we now have to get a tape to watch the show for ourselves.

Mr Ingraham opened himself to the press and frankly answered questions that highlighted the concerns of the public.

He dismissed the PLP’s promise to retake the majority shares of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company as so much “fluff.”

Mr Christie should know that such a move — a breach of contract — would destroy this country as a place to do business. While this government pleads for job creation, they shoot themselves in the foot by using bullying tactics against an investor.

Instead, if the PLP were sincere in wanting Bahamians to have more of a share in the telecommunications business, it would offer nine per cent of the 40 per cent it now holds for the public, said Mr Ingraham. Mr Ingraham has suggested that these shares be sold to the public at the same price that Cable and Wireless Communications was able to purchase its 51 per cent majority stake.

But for government to get 51 per cent control of this company would destroy it. Again it would be a repeat of politics as usual, rather than good sound business.

This would be a public disaster. At least we give Mr Christie credit for having enough intelligence to know this, and – we hope — be smart enough not to let it happen.

Mr Ingraham commented on the promised referendum for a national lottery and the taxing of web shops. Mr Christie is gung-ho on the gambling referendum, but we would like to know what happened to the referendum to give married women the same rights as Bahamian men — a referendum, which Mr Christie boasted many years ago that only he could win. We now challenge him to live up to his proud boast. At the time we dismissed what he said as a lot of hot air. So far time has proved us right. We would like to see the day come when he can prove us wrong.

Mr Ingraham also dealt with victimisation — a subject that we shall hear a lot more about as time moves on.

For the sake of this country we hope that the PLP will do well, but we are not holding our breath. We think that Bahamians will live to rue the day that they let a good man go.