WE agree with former prime minister Hubert Ingraham that elections rather than a short time in prison settles ”scores between populations and politicians.”

Bahamians, have possibly for the first time learned the power of their vote, and how, with it, they can deliver the most devastating verdict of all against politicians who have betrayed their trust.

“If crimes are committed, criminal activities committed and police have evidence then police ought to proceed with it against whomsoever, politicians or non-politicians,” Mr Ingraham said. “But there ought not to be a witch hunt against people. If there’s evidence somebody abused their authority in office or evidence of misfeasance then that’s possible, but not to do otherwise. I come from the school of thought that generally speaking elections settle scores between the populations and politicians and sometimes a loss is a bigger punishment for them than six months in prison because he spends the rest of his life with this thing that he regards as humiliation.”

Bahamians seem more anxious now to open the prison gates for those whom they perceive as political offenders. However, we strongly advise that they turn their full attention to helping rebuild their nation, and let the police deal with suspected political offences and offenders.

We do not believe that Bahamians as yet fully understand the seriousness of this country’s economic crisis. This means that many promises made by the dismissed PLP government – or even this government —cannot possibly be fulfilled at this time.

For example, when one considers the present condition of the Princess Margaret Hospital, it would be madness to even attempt to introduce National Health Insurance at an estimated annual cost of $100 million. No one yet knows where such funds are to be obtained, but if available should be used to raise the standard of the existing hospital before trying to achieve the impossible just for political kudos. The dilapidation of the Princess Margaret Hospital is a story in itself. To say it is in a subhuman state is an understatement. Recently a leading American doctor was taken on a tour. He was so shocked at what he saw that he said if the PMH were in the United States it would have been immediately condemned and closed.

Another area that needs close examination is the cost of maintaining and staffing so many foreign missions. Take Washington for example where a Bahamas Embassy is already established with an ambassador in residence. It is customary that a Consular office with a consul general is located in the Embassy. But not so for the penny poor, but ostentatious Bahamas. Under the PLP this consul general was established in offices and a residence of her own, with a three year lease, which has not as yet been completed. Why was this extra expense needed in the first place? Surely, this consular office will be closed and relocated in the Embassy, where it should have been in the first place.

Then there are embassies and consular offices around the world that could be closed and arrangements made for an already established foreign embassy to take the Bahamas under its wing for representation - or even rent a small office within that embassy to be manned by a Bahamian representative. It would certainly be less costly and just as effective.

Before the PLP came to power in 1967, it was established that anyone travelling on behalf of the government had to get permission, and on return had to submit a statement of expenses. However, once the PLP became the government there were long and unpleasant arguments by the new politicians, who believed that travel expenses should be a part of their perks.

We recall a political fight in 1988 when the then Opposition tried to get Sir Lynden to give a financial accounting of a trade mission to the Far East. On that mission no one involved with trade was included, but among the delegates were a campaign general for one of the ministers, a personal friend of Sir Lynden who sold motor scooters, and a government minister who at the time could not get an American visa to enter the United States. Sir Lynden refused to give an accounting. However, on another mission to the Far East, Sir Lynden’s delegation included 22 people and cost the country $98,922.

And now we come to the the five years of former foreign affairs minister Fred Mitchell who believed that the job of a foreign minister was to travel. In 2013 he announced that he intended to take most of that year off to spend in the Middle East and Asia looking for investments to fund our “capital starved” Treasury. We don’t know how much the Treasury benefitted, but the following year he arrived with what he claimed was $500,000 worth of “high grader phosphate” fertilizer as a gift from the Moroccan government. We don’t know what this could possibly have contributed to the Treasury, but Mr Mitchell assured Bahamians that it showed a “strong relationship between the Bahamas and Morocco.”

He even found time for two years before her election to pledge his personal support to the Baroness Scotland to head CHOGM, and convince then prime minister Christie to throw the Bahamas’ vote behind her. He thought she would provide for the best interest of the Bahamas. She won the post, as far as we know, she has done nothing for the Bahamas, but has succeeded in attracting a press that has completely discredited her.

We now believe that the country is owed an accounting of all of Mr Mitchell’s trips and how much they have either taken from or contributed to the Public Treasury.

However, with so many embassies and consular offices around the world, and the use of video conferencing, the travelling of a Foreign Minister has to be curtailed and every person who undertakes a mission on behalf of this country should be required to give a detailed accounting of his/her expenses.

Yes, a new day has arrived in this country. The nonsense must stop.