So here's what Mrs Coleby Davis is guilty of, and she repeats this over and over, she's not listening and she's not addressing the complaint.

Every Bahamian who has submitted a proposal to a govt department, been told to wait, and wait, and wait, then saw another initiative announced that looks eerily similar to what they submitted, is fully aware their proposal either didnt reach cabinet or wasnt approved. The assumption is it stopped on someone's desk. The "talk on the street", for decades, about proposals submitted to the old BAIC was just this.

What Bahamians are asking for IP protection with teeth. If you deem that an individual doesnt have the resources to implement what you've assessed as a great idea, what better way to support Bahamian innovation than creating an ecosystem around them to see **their** idea get done. **In general, taking someone's idea under the rationale *they couldn't they do it anyway or they wouldnt have come to us*, amounts to IP theft**

This is ridiculous. If the plan is to operate a courier facility the Town Centre Mall is much better equipped to handle the volume all they gat is space and any digitization plan they come up with will need funding from the ground up, that Indepence shopping plaza is a derelict building. It would have to be demolished and rebuilt from foundation. After the taxis, carnival, BEC fuel hedge I'm now convinced Mrs Coleby will say anything to redirect contracts

For who

"*the very least of our duty to the country” to give them preferential treatment by returning their funds.*"
This is illegal

This is very very bad if true. Leaders should not be accepting these gifts that are clearly intended to buy favour. The PM is wealthy enough to pay for his own courtside tickets

This.

"*Can we deliver the services which the public demands from a building which was delivered in 1815*"

A new building is undeserved and will do nothing to alter the unqualified seat warmers and desk bangers the parties puts forward every 5years

"*Let me just say how disgusted I am tonight with this particular incident occurring here yet in a shopping plaza where members of the public traverse on a daily basis. This is unacceptable and this will not be tolerated.*"

I understand the sentiment because the "*this could have harmed me or my loved ones*" hits home. Former PM Christie made a similar statement when his personal police guard was shot.

But the time to be outraged and disgusted was 10 years ago when young men were getting shot through Dog Flea Alley where decent families also frequent. But the posture was different. The former police commissioner actually vocalized it, paraphrasing, ~"*the people being killed aren't us, they're criminals. No need to fear*".

There was a time years ago when I wouldnt even vocalize my greatest fear, that someone would enter the movie theater at the mall and unleash a barrage of bullets to kill a rival, it was far fetched, at the time, but I thought this is where we're headed if we dont stop this. We are here.

**Corruption in high places needs to be eradicated. It's not the men in the tin box Japanese cars who are the root cause of this**. It's the ring of men driving hummers and BMs, living behind the most exclusive gates, going to the best restaurants, hob knobbing with the PM, funding both sides of the political campaigns, sitting in the front pew at church and being praised by the bishop for their support because no money is bad money. They're the cause. Call Scotland Yard, get rid of them.

I'm still waiting to hear what this looks like in terms of cost. BAMSI for example sells at low prices, but those prices are likely artificial, can it be sustained and is it scaleable. I'm not referring to BAMSi as the sole provider, but over all local food production suppliers, can we provide affordable meat, vegetables, fruit, grains of import level quality, for the entire nation at affordable prices

"*This means the latter (govt) now stands in their place and will be compensated by the liquidator’s recovery.*"

Does this mean that if the govt convinced an individual to settle for 50% of what they painstakingly saved over 50 years, the govt gets with the swipe of a pen to take 50% of that individual's money? In this example I can understand if the govt was only able to collect 50% of the amount from clico, but if they collected the entire 100%, it seems unseemly for govt to take 50% of someone's life earnings.