THE situation with the employment of Cuban workers in The Bahamas continues to show a lack of clarity when everything should be very simple.

It all comes after the United States issued a very general warning – to all and sundry rather than The Bahamas specifically.

The visas of government officials could be at risk, the US warned, for any nations involved in forced labour, a form of human trafficking.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned that foreign government officials involved in Cuba’s labour export programme, particularly Cuba’s overseas medical missions, could face visa restrictions.

Elsewhere in the region, some leaders spoke out firmly about the action.

In Barbados, Prime Minister Mia Mottley said her country does not employ Cuba medical professionals, but credited Cuban doctors and nurses with helping the country navigate the COVID-19 pandemic, saying the country could not have managed without them.

In Trinidad and Tobago, and St Vincent and the Grenadines, leaders also rejected the US characterisation of Cuban missions as forced labour.

SVG Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves said: “If it is determined that you have to take away my visa, I want to say this publicly it will be reported… The haemodialysis, which we do in St Vincent at the Modern Medical and Diagnostic, without the Cubans there I would not be able to offer that service.”

Mr Rubio says the “forced labour” scheme enriches the Cuban regime, and deprives Cubans of medical care in their home country.

The Bahamas has welcomed Cuban workers as both teachers and in the medical field under successive administrations.

When questioned in mid-March about the situation, Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell declined to comment.

Then, last week, The Tribune reported on documents leaked by the Free Society Project (Cuba Archive) suggesting that while The Bahamas agreed to pay thousands of dollars per month for each Cuban health worker, the workers themselves only received monthly stipends of $990-$1,200. The rest of the payment – between 84 and 92 percent of the total – appears to have gone to the Cuban state agency that manages overseas deployments.

Health Minister Dr Michael Darville said he planned to compare the leaked documents with the ones he signed to determine their accuracy, but has not yet reported back. Mr Mitchell blasted out a voice note about “purloined documents”, but again their authenticity or otherwise has not been clarified.

Now Prime Minister Philip Davis is apparently going to talk to the Cuban government about the situation.

In terms of the payments, it is very simple. Either we did or did not agree to these payments. Mr Mitchell described the documents as purloined – stolen – but not faked. We have the contract we signed, it ought to be a very straightforward process to confirm if they are genuine.

If they are, and we are paying as much as $12,000 a month for a worker who only receives a tiny fraction of that sum, then this may well fall under the eye of the US concerns over the Cuban regime lining its pockets.

And to be clear, our government can duck the questions as much as it likes with the Bahamian public – although it should not, that is our money – but it is unlikely to get away with such manoeuvres with the US government.

If the leaked papers are fake, if the Cuban staff members are not working for a pittance, then it would be very easy to demonstrate otherwise by releasing the real figures.

It is unclear what exactly the prime minister would need to talk to the Cuban government about – a contract is a contract. Whatever we have signed up to, that’s the deal.

The Cuban workers in their various fields have proven to be a real benefit to The Bahamas – helping out in our hospitals and in our schools. They certainly deserve to be treated fairly, and they do not deserve to be caught in a game of political tug-of-war. But a fair wage for a fair day’s work is the least anyone can expect.

The government has had ample time to clarify the situation to the Bahamian public. They can choose to do so at any time. You may draw your own conclusions from why they have not.