Thursday, December 17, 2020
By RASHAD ROLLE
Tribune Senior Reporter
rrolle@tribunemedia.net
FORMER Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Peter Turnquest has criticised as discriminatory a provision in a new Bill that would prevent foreigners from engaging in commercial fishing in The Bahamas.
Mr Turnquest’s comment in the House of Assembly yesterday followed the contribution of Marco City MP Michael Pintard concerning the new Fisheries Bill 2020, which will replace the Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) Act, 1977 when passed.
A key provision of the bill says: “No person shall engage in fishing, or be employed on a commercial fishing vessel for fishing other than sport fishing in the fisheries waters; and use or be employed on a commercial fishing vessel licenced under this act for fishing other than charter sport fishing, unless that person is a citizen of The Bahamas.”
Mr Turnquest, who resigned from Cabinet under controversy last month, said the provision is discriminatory.
He said: “Does that mean that spousal permit holders and permanent residents are likewise excluded from being able to fish? And if that is in fact the case, how do we square that with the constitution and general human right? Because I would think that any spouse of a Bahamian should have the right to support their family in whatever their skill is and I think it’s a slippery slope because if you start with fishing, then is the hotel industry next?”
Mr Turnquest asked whether human rights organisations were consulted on the provision, saying: “We do not want to continue to perpetuate a discriminatory policy against Bahamian women in particular because let’s face it, that’s what we’re talking about. The constitution already has some built-in discriminatory clauses, this seems to be further entrenching that discriminatory clause were we males are saying to these females that we don’t trust you to make a decision about your spouse…and it also seems to be admitting that maybe the Immigration Department is not able to police these marriages of convenience and thus we are punishing people who actually have a sustainable marriage.”
In response, Mr Pintard said administrations have missed the “marvelous opportunity to create parity in the constitution by supporting Bahamian men and women.”
He continued: “But this bill is not the flashpoint to relitigate those issues which we should address, so I don’t seek to have the important, wide ranging provisions in this Bill to be subsumed in the discussion on this one aspect but to answer the question pointedly we sit in this House, it is a privilege on many levels, one of those privileges seems to be there are a number of spouses of Bahamians who are equally and in some cases more talented than persons in this room but who by virtue of a carve out in our system cannot offer for the House of Assembly and I’ve not heard a petition by a member in this place or the other place petitioning for their participation and highlighting what they term to be discrimination.”
During his contribution, Mr Pintard said: “The introduction of foreign nationals within the sector has been problematic from the onset. While their involvement have proven to be beneficial for some Bahamian commercial vessel owners, it has created division within the sector. Further, with the introduction of these individuals, certain harmful fishing practices have evolved, some of which are featured in the decline of certain species, including the Queen Conch, and health (diver) concerns of fishers. Another important element, which involves foreign fishers, is the matter of alleged marriages of convenience. This matter may be linked to human trafficking, and forced labour practices.”
Last month, the Bahamas Commercial Fishers Alliance applauded the tabling of the Fisheries Bill.
Describing the Bill as historic, Mr Pintard said the process toward debating the Bill in Parliament took ten years across successive administrations, “at least nine major public consultations, numerous stakeholder meetings and countless hours of media interviews, drafting and editing.”
He said developing the fisheries sector “is seen as having the greatest potential for the immediate development of Family Island economies, in particular islands in the Southeastern Bahamas.”
He noted that fisheries contribute just below one percent to the country’s GDP, employing 15,000 people full-time. He said total production of fisheries products over the past five years has averaged around six million pounds, corresponding to an average value of some $54.3 million.
He said these numbers can dramatically increase.
Comments
tribanon says...
Perhaps Peter Turnquest can explain why he does not think it's discriminatory that foreigners, but not Bahamians, can access sources of foreign capital to invest in large scale endeavours in our country like commercial fishing. For decades now most Bahamian investors have been hamstrung in their ability to access foreign sources of capital by an exchange control regime that discriminates against them and favours foreign investors.
If Turnquest had his way, he would roll out the red carpet for Communist China to engage in massive commercial fishing operations in our territorial waters to the point where all of our fish supplies would be depleted within a few short years. And of course he, like all of our other corrupt politicians, would expect to get a sliver of the pie on the side for helping his Communist Chinese masters conquer our country.
The Communist Chinese have access to unlimited sources of capital and are quite literally in the process of 'buying-up' what they perceive to be, from the standpoint of their own strategic interests, the scarcest and most prized limited resources in our country. For Turnquest to suggest sensible policies and legislation to protect ourselves are discriminatory against foreigners is the height of absurdity, and some would even say treasonous on his part.
Notwithstanding all of the hogwash to the contray spewed our way by self-serving globalist bureaucrats who represent greedy and powerful corporate interests based in the world's most developed countries, Bahamians have a fundamental sovereign right to protect their vital interests from being unfairly and/or harmfully exploited by foreigners and there's nothing the least bit discriminatory in doing so.
Posted 17 December 2020, 11:14 a.m. Suggest removal
KapunkleUp says...
@tribanon - have you seen the Jinping Shuffle?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPaieGy…
Posted 17 December 2020, 11:40 a.m. Suggest removal
FrustratedBusinessman says...
If people like Turnquest had their way, saying "Bahamas for Bahamians" would be labeled as "hate speech" and made a crime.
Posted 17 December 2020, 12:54 p.m. Suggest removal
FrustratedBusinessman says...
Good agree with Pintard 100%. We need to protect our citizenry first and foremost.
There is indeed an issue with marriages of convenience in the fishing industry, and I am very glad that Pintard is helping to protect Bahamian fisherman on this matter.
Posted 17 December 2020, 12:55 p.m. Suggest removal
The_Oracle says...
Its all well and fine to say Bahamas for Bahamians 100%,
but be thankful the US does not say the same with respect of their food supplies, fuel, Meds,
etc etc.
All amendments to legislation passed since the early 90's have consistently produced unintended consequences, and none of the intended results.
Add to that being poorly written, amendments upon amendments for spelling, omission,
The inevitable result of presenting documents written by people who cannot write, to people who can read.
Posted 18 December 2020, 9:27 a.m. Suggest removal
Log in to comment