EDITOR, The Tribune. 

A profound and telling moment has unfolded on the steps of the House of Assembly, one that should concern every citizen of The Bahamas.

As union leaders, representing the very civil servants who keep our country running, sought a direct audience with the Prime Minister, they were met not with an open door, but with a wall of police and bodyguards. In that moment of frustration, union leader Belinda Wilson declared, “You cannot hide behind the camera lens; you must come and face the people.” 

This was not mere rhetoric. It was a perfect and damning diagnosis of a leadership style that is failing the fundamental test of accountability, authenticity, and courage.

The ongoing industrial action by government employees is not a sudden crisis. It is the result of a breakdown in process and trust, a breakdown exacerbated by the Prime Minister’s own actions. 

The scheduled meetings were a positive step, a return to the framework of dialogue that should govern such disputes. However, following the first meeting, the government’s response has been a masterclass in avoidance. The Prime Minister’s decision to cancel further discussions and instead deliver a 15-minute address to the nation was the first act of “hiding behind the lens.”

In that broadcast, he presented himself as a benevolent figure, claiming he acted “out of the goodness of his heart” to raise wages. This framing is deeply problematic. It seeks to recast a collective bargaining obligation, a matter of contractual and moral duty to public servants as a personal favor.

This is not authentic leadership. It is the posture of a patron, not a partner. True leadership operates with transparency and within established frameworks, not by bypassing them to claim unearned credit. 

Furthermore, his speech conspicuously failed to address the critical details that workers desperately needed to hear. The retroactive period for back pay, which employees qualify, and a concrete timeline for payment. By using the one-way medium of television, he insulated himself from the immediate, necessary questions these omissions demanded. This was a deliberate avoidance of responsibility, substituting the illusion of action for the difficult substance of governance.

The situation has now moved from the abstract to the tangible. When unions exercised their democratic right to protest and marched to the House of Assembly, they carried with them a simple, powerful request: to be heard. 

Their attempt to request an audience with the Prime Minister upon his departure was a test of his professed goodwill. He failed utterly. The deployment of security personnel to limit access and refuse a meeting transformed a metaphorical barrier into a physical one. The “camera lens” he hid behind the night before was now made flesh in the form of bodyguards. 

This action demonstrated a profound emotional detachment from the people he leads. These were not protestors in the abstract. They are the teachers, the nurses, the clerical staff, and the janitorial workers of our nation. 

Their march was a plea for recognition, not just as employees, but as human beings deserving of dignity and a direct conversation. To treat them as a security threat to be managed is to reveal a chilling disconnect from the human reality of this dispute.

This pattern of behavior by retreating to a scripted broadcast, canceling negotiations, and refusing a direct meeting points to a root cause far more worrying than political miscalculation. It is a fear of vulnerability. 

For a leader, vulnerability is not a weakness. It is the courageous capacity to be present in a conflict without total control. It is the strength to listen to anger, to face dissent, and to have one’s certainty challenged. 

The Prime Minister’s actions show a man fearful of the unscripted moment, the probing question, the possibility of being seen as uncertain or wrong. He has prioritized his own political safety and image-control over the resolution of a conflict that affects thousands of families and the stability of our public services. A leader who fears the people he leads cannot truly serve them.

The ramifications of this leadership style are severe and extend far beyond this single labor dispute. Firstly, it shatters trust. When a leader speaks of generosity but acts with avoidance, he teaches the nation that his words cannot be trusted. The social contract between the government and its citizens, and especially its employees, is built on a foundation of good faith. That foundation is now cracking. 

Secondly, it sets a dangerous precedent for governance. If complex issues are to be handled not through diligent negotiation but through prime-time performances followed by retreat, then our democratic processes are rendered meaningless. We devolve from a nation of laws and agreements to a nation of presidential decrees and staged broadcasts.

The core message of Belinda Wilson’s statement is the core message of democratic leadership itself. That true authority is earned through accountability, presence, and courage. 

The Prime Minister must now do what he has thus far refused. He must step from behind the protective barriers, both electronic and human and directly face the people. This means, concretely, immediately reconvening the cancelled meetings without preconditions. It means providing the clear, specific, and written answers on back pay that were absent from his television address. It means engaging in good-faith negotiation, respecting the unions not as adversaries to be defeated, but as partners in the stewardship of our nation’s workforce.

The damning effect of his current course is a crisis of credibility that tarnishes his office. A leadership style built on performance over substance, on avoidance over engagement, cannot endure. It tells every public servant that their government views them as a line item, not a partner. 

It signals to every Bahamian that their leader is more comfortable with the trappings of power than with the responsibilities of it. To lead is to be seen, to be challenged, and to be accountable. By consistently choosing to hide, the Prime Minister has prolonged a painful dispute and exposed a hollow core at the heart of his leadership. 

He must now choose. Will he continue to hide, or will he finally come and face the people he was elected to serve?  

B AZZAN JOHNSON 

Freeport,

Grand Bahama 

October 15, 2025.