The government's White Paper on Over the Hill rehabilitation says most people in Bain and Grants Town are also living on "free land" which is to say that just like in the shanty towns, land title is unclear. Should we kick them out too? Or are they of the "right" ethnicity to be allowed to stay?

No case? Lol Smith will win. If not at the Supreme Court then at the Court of Appeal, and certainly at the Privy Council, which exists outside our hotbox of ethnic hatred and paranoia. Let me say it again for jackbnimble" "Smith's point is that there is a clear case of discrimination going on here. The government says the shanty towns are unregulated. Ok, but then they have also admitted that Over The Hill communities are unregulated, and face the same sanitation, building code and land title issues as shanty towns. Also, the Shanty Town Task Force found that only 6% of those living in shanty towns are illegal. The other 94% have a right to be here. So, why is the government rehabilitating Over the Hill but demolishing shanty towns if their issues are almost identical and if neither is populated by a majority of illegals? There an only be one answer, because one is populated by Bahamians and the other by mostly legal Haitians. That is discrimination and it is illegal in The Bahamas. Read the constitution. "

Thanks. I'm glad somebody has some sense.

MadHatter, how does that follow from what I said? We don't need the Haitian constitution, our own constitution says what the government is doing is illegal. Please read carefully and don't allow your ethnic hatred to cloud your vision. There is zero justification for this policy and it is baldfaced discrimination.

Smith's point is that there is a clear case of discrimination going on here. The government says the shanty towns are unregulated. Ok, but then they have also admitted that Over The Hill communities are unregulated, and face the same sanitation, building code and land title issues as shanty towns. Also, the Shanty Town Task Force found that only 6% of those living in shanty towns are illegal. The other 94% have a right to be here. So, why is the government rehabilitating Over the Hill but demolishing shanty towns if their issues are almost identical and if neither is populated by a majority of illegals? There an only be one answer, because one is populated by Bahamians and the other by mostly legal Haitians. That is discrimination and it is illegal in The Bahamas. Read the constitution.

@proudloudandfnm - I must disagree with the premise of your argument. Projects that stand to have a positive impact on the public generally should be given to whomever is best at it. Not saying that the Symonettes are in this particular case, just speaking generally. Some people end up or remain super rich because they are good at what they do and insofar as Bahamians generally stand to benefit financially in the long run, I don't mind that the rich also get richer. Our problem for years has been exactly what you are suggesting: artificially create new rich people because it is their 'turn', like this is a schoolyard game or something. This leads to incompetence, poor performance and disastrous economic consequences because those people do not qualify. If they did, they would be super rich already. Our call should be: stop trying to artificially create rich people! the best man for the job always!

Throw calculations at me all you want. I tell you I have witnessed Cabinet ministers quaking in their boots before these aggressive, hard talking cruise execs and handing them whatever they demand. The cruise companies always argue that 'You need us more than we need you.' And they always win.

Personally I also blame the government, but either way, these islands are a raw deal for the Bahamas.

What you say may be true but that's not the point. Plausible or not these are the tactics used, and geographically-challenged or not, our governments tremble before the wrath of the cruise ship lobby whenever they do threaten. I'm not making this up, I have witnessed it first hand. And would you really be surprised? You think Hubert Minnis or Perry Christie have any idea how long it will take a cruise ship to get to Cuba, or Turks, or St. Thomas? Might as well ask those two gentlemen to build a nuclear reactor from scratch.

Nonsense. Ragged Island is irrelevant to this discussion. We are not talking about previously inhabited islands, but ecologically sensitive cays that were not developed, costing literally zero to 'run'. These islands are coveted by the cruise companies precisely because it allows them to divert revenue from Bahamian ports and into their pockets. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother acquiring the islands. And however much the government gained through the sale, it pales in comparison to the millions lost by Bahamian businesses as a result. This is money taken directly out of their pockets and placed in the pockets of the cruise companies. In return, we get a one time payment, much smaller, which goes to government which is bound to waste at least half of it.