Much ado about nothing. It's okay to be boorish and disrespectful and nasty but when the favour is returned then everyone wants to get bent out of shape and shout "foul". If I commit a flagrant foul, I'm liable to be ejected and maybe have to sit on the sidelines for a few games.

Actually @John isn't far off the mark in some respects. Fifty years ago when I was a teenager, the police embraced what suspiciously seemed to me to be a Wild West type policy of shooting criminal suspects who they considered to be Wild West type bandits. My first memory is their shooting a man named L'il Ounce who they accused of all sorts of misdeeds. Then in more recent times we have criminals on bail getting shot or shooting up others under mysterious circumstances and few arrests made, few charged and few convicted. But Commissioner after Commissioner complained about persons let out on bail possibly to commit more crimes but some of them get killed before ever going back to court. Commissioner Ferguson seemed unconcerned that civilians are being killed by his officers not all of whom are armed with guns or shooting at police officers. The persons investigating these shootings are police officers under the Commissioner's command. So there's no independence in the process. Who can forget the police shooting of the young man in the back of the old City Market near Kemp Road that was never satisfactorily answered by the force? Police officers are given the ability to carry and use firearms but it also comes with the heavy responsibility to be answerable whenever the firearm is used, not a cloak to kill anybody, anytime, anywhere and then holler that "it was justified" just because you wear the uniform. It's not a licence to kill indiscriminately but under very strict and controlled circumstances that have to be explained and stand up to public scrutiny.

In this country, we the public do not know what are the written policies, procedures and processes governing the use of firearms by police officers, particularly in the cases of killing of civilians and others while on-duty. Similarly, there is no independent body which includes civilians that investigates on-duty killings by police officers. The same way that the Attorney-General has been removed from involvement in criminal prosecutions in this and other countries, the modern approach is to have a body independent of the police investigate police-involved killings. Also, the entire coroner's court process needs to be reviewed to see how these matters can come to court and be disposed of quicker than is currently the case. Is 2.5 years or more a satisfactory timeframe to dispose of these cases? What are the bottlenecks in the system and how can these cases be concluded quicker? Time for governments to put some of the money that they make in fines and fees from the courts back into the system to improve it.

And Picewell was supposed to be a shining example of the New PLP! They are in more trouble than they know but I will wait the full 5 years before making any predictions about the FNM winning hands down again in 2022. The FNM is all over the place with everyone who was unable to speak on behalf of the party spouting off the first thing that comes to their head. They haven't shown yet what is their cohesive plan for turning this country around and fixing what's broken, corrupt, inefficient and ineffective in this country. The lesson they need to learn from their 2017 victory is that, once in office, you have to have a viable plan of action so that if and when you take over you hit the ground running with plans, policies, and the persons to carry them out. Right now everything is pillar to post and, taking marital rape as one example, they seem to get distracted from the job at hand by going off on something that is important to a small number of people without being able to say when they are going to fix the things that benefit the greatest number of people. Yes marital rape is important but not more important than job creation, fixing public services and public amenities and laying out for us what is your game plan and timetable. Too many things waiting out there to be addressed in some sort of order.

These Canadian banks are not making the kind of money in the Caribbean area that they used to make, coupled with significant numbers of bad, difficult to recover, loans that they are carrying on their books. Similarly they don't own many of the premises that they operate from. So, in these Family Islands they are suffering declining revenues, declining customer bases and heavy operational expenses. They do a cost/benefit analysis and conclude that it's less costly for them to take a one-time financial hit and close their unprofitable Family Island branches. DPM Turnquest is way off base if he wants you to believe that these closures are due to technology. The same technology that these banks have in the Bahamas is the same technology that they have available to them in Canada but you don't see them shutting down or consolidating branches in Canada the way they are doing in the Bahamas. It's all about what can you do for me today in terms of revenues and they are just not the same in the Bahamas any more.

I lost my job because my bosswanted to replace me first with his cousin and then with a PLP minister's wife. Happy to have had the job but when they don't want you then you move on and find another. What's the old saying: "As one door closes another opens". Bottom line when you work in any job it's yours for a time, not a lifetime. Under employment law, you can be let go at any time for a reason or for none, the only issue being whether you are justly compensated in notice pay or its equivalent at the time of termination.

Not true. You forget about the conviction of Wilbert Moss the plp mical mp.

Entire article is based on the views of persons from one company that is likely to encounter severe competitive pressure from Western Union. Don't see how that makes for much in the way of "diversity of views". These entities wil either engage in umbrella pricing like the gas stations and the phone companies where one company charges a few cents less than its competitors for the same product and tries to sell us on the idea that we are getting so much better service for our few cents. This is not real competition.

I hope that Brave is kidding but I know that he is not. Troublesome that he and other PLPs would think that this type of contract is okay but worse still that he has the nerve to verbalize it. Employment is based on trust and he's telling me that if I no longer want or trust this employee I must either keep her for 3 years or give her 3 years pay to go away. He can't be serious. If he wants to do that in his law firm with his own money, fine, but he should be more judicious and circumspect when it comes to doling out public funds, regardless of who it is and whatever their affinity to him or his party. Whoever this woman is, there is no expertise that she brings to any position that is worth 3 years pay to get rid of. No one is born into any position or preordained to keep it forever. You have a position for a time and when it ends, through death, retirement, termination or resignation, then you move on. To give someone a 1 year termination clause is not unusual for a person with an exceptional skillset or who has a rare specialty that is not otherwise available in the local job market, but the usual period is from 3 to 6 months. Can anyone explain what specialized skills this woman has, not otherwise available in the Bahamian job market, that would merit her getting a 3 year termination clause?

Much ado about nothing. The number of prosecutions for this type of offence in other countries is minuscule and it will be no different here. Good for PR to have it on the books. Possibility of any real prosecutions, slim to none.