By Malcolm Strachan

WHAT politicians say and what they do can sometimes be oceans apart – and we’ve seen a lot of that lately.

The last few days have seen the visit of the royal couple, Prince William and Kate, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, take the spotlight. Lots of noise, lots of spectacle, but what about the substance?

One of their first ports of call was to see Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis, who said discussions “did touch on some matters of mutual interest (like) climate change, carbon credits and the fact that it appears from where he was observing that The Bahamas is really punching above its weight in respect to leading the voice on climate change and the existential threat that it has, not just to a small island developing state like ours, but the whole world.”

Aside from the fact that it might be nice if the Prime Minister had let Prince William say this himself rather than just passing on what was said behind closed doors, let’s consider what is really going on here.

Mr Davis is essentially patting himself on the back for his speech at the Glasgow climate conference – which did indeed gain international attention. But what have we done since?

A discussion that does little more than “touch on” issues such as climate change probably wasn’t of very much weight, but at least it’s on the agenda.

Now, what’s our agenda on the matter? Because apart from that speech and a suggestion from Mr Davis that The Bahamas can earn money from its carbon credits, what have we actually done to deal with climate change? There’s that gap between what we say and what we do.

Has there been legislation on zoning laws, for example, to ban construction in projected flood zones? Are we reducing our own emissions? Are we moving to renewable energy? Or is it just all talk?

Even in his description of the discussion, Mr Davis says that climate change is an existential threat – as in a threat to our continued existence, so what next, Mr Davis?

Mr Davis is far from alone in the distance between what is said and what is done, however.

Let’s talk about crime, shall we? Time and again we hear about how crime is under control – last month Police Commissioner Paul Rolle said “a preliminary review of crime indicates that the deliverables targeted were achieved, as evidenced by the overall rate of crime remaining unchanged by the end of 2021”. So serious crime is not increasing, apparently, but last week National Security Minister says the country needs 900 more constables and wants to put police officers into the schools. One of these things is not like the other.

How about Lisa Rahming, the State Minister for Social Services and Urban Development, who very earnestly declared that there was a need for public education on gender-based violence before any new legislation was introduced. We had a lot of education about that for the last referendum, but it didn’t seem to help.

When pressed on the details, Ms Rahming’s education plan seemed to go to pieces, however. She was asked about the terminology that would be used with regard to marital rape – but said that nothing has been determined in that regard. It’s not a great start to an education plan if you can’t simply say that rape is rape. She was asked whether she indeed believed that rape is rape, but refused to say what her position is on that or on marital rape itself. It sounds to me like it’s not the public that needs to be educated on the issue as much as the minister of state herself, perhaps.

How can you say that the public needs to learn the details of the issues if you can’t commit your own mouth to articulating what the issues are? You can’t be serious.

That’s all without even looking at the settlement for former Cabinet Minister Shane Gibson – paid $2.5m in his settlement with the government over malicious prosecution and false imprisonment. Mr Gibson is, of course, entitled to take his lawsuit up, but in comparison Douglas Ngumi, who was detained for six and a half years unlawfully and subjected to inhumane treatment, was awarded just $750,950. That contrast raises more than an eyebrow.

The Organisation for Responsible Governance has said that the settlement underscores the need for the establishment of an Integrity Commission. ORG is right, but don’t hold your breath waiting for such a commission.

Let’s round off with a visit to Grand Bahama – where Minister Ginger Moxey said there are “robust plans” for the International Bazaar. She said she was excited about it, along with the reopening of the road at the Royal Oasis Resort at a date that remains unrevealed, and that there was “a lot that is going to be going on there”. However, she then said: “I can’t say too much on it”. Why not? If there actually is a plan, why not publish it, table it, let local residents see what’s coming? Or will this be another case where words and actions don’t match up?

I’d love to be proven wrong on any of these issues – let’s see if I am.