Dear Editor,
I read with interest the personal opinion of "Simon" in the column Front Porch of The Nassau Guardian Tuesday, October 30, regarding the leader of the opposition.
Simon rightly said that the leader of the opposition post is a stepping stone to potentially the most rewarding elected office in our parliamentary system. We know that there are many who toiled and worked hard for years to achieve that coveted post. However, on May 7, 2012, it all came crashing down when not only did the Free National Movement suffer a devastating loss, but some who felt destined to hold the post as leader were rejected at the polls by The Bahamian public.
To add fuel to the fire, the leader, whom many of us still love, admire and even revere, immediately walked away after the devastating bombshell blow. I will never forget that night as I sat near my TV waiting for a word of hope, of reassurance, of comfort, when Hubert Alexander Ingraham walked out on May 7, conceded defeat and then dealt the final and fatal blow that he would resign. What thousands of supporters needed to hear if only that one night was, "Yes we lost, but we will get up, brush ourselves off and we will carry on". Even more so because of the fact that the entire campaign was riding on the strength, character and integrity of Hubert Alexander Ingraham. I have always been a fan of Hubert Ingraham and will always be, but I gotta tell you, to have him walk away at a time like that was devastating and somewhat embarrassing to say the least.
Given the swift departure of Ingraham, it was inevitable that the party would immediately go through some severe "withdrawal" symptoms. In fact, it is likely that anyone who had gained the converted position of leader under those circumstances would have had to deal with some disgruntled people who felt as if they had a right to and deserved the post.
Simon criticized Dr. Minnis for stating how he would vote in the event of a referendum. No, we do not know what the question will be. As far as I know Dr. Minnis indicated that his position was a personal one and had no bearing on his party. What makes him any different from the hundreds inside and outside the political arena who have already stated their position regarding gambling? It's a personal choice. I am personally against gambling in any form, but the fact that Dr. Minnis was willing to be open and honest about his personal choice is in no way reflective of his ability to lead, except to say that he is honest enough to be truthful about his personal convictions, instead of ducking and dodging and playing "politricks" like so many others have done.
Simon also criticized Dr. Minnis for "raising expectations" in the Abaco by-election. Well blow me down. What was he supposed to do as a leader, Simon? Is it not his duty as leader to be positive and to not accept or even entertain failure before it happens? And as far as accepting the blame is concerned, have you had a chance to speak with the wonderful people of Abaco to find out exactly why many of them refused to vote FNM or not vote at all? I think you need to go and find out what the real problem was. And trust me, you can be assured that it was not Hubert Alexander Minnis. Additionally, what if the FNM had won? Would it have been okay for Dr. Minnis to insist that he alone was responsible for the win? I think not.
Dr. Minnis' comments that Ingraham's era was over after the by-election may seem out of order considering the great leadership and the contribution made by Ingraham, but the truth is that it needed to be said publicly. Dr. Minnis had sat back for months and taken much flack from supporters and non-supporters alike. People were asking who the real leader of the party was; there were rumors that Ingraham had handpicked Greg Gomez; and the list of observations and complaints went on and on. What would you have done Simon?

In my opinion, Dr. Minnis had no choice. I am certain that his words were in no way an attempt to belittle Ingraham but to simply set the record straight. Get it right people, Hubert Alexander Minnis is now leader.
Simon himself said that "the post of leader of the opposition is one of the more difficult political offices for all manner of reasons" but then he went on to itemize and give his personal opinions on everything that he perceives has been done wrong by the leader of the opposition. You know, you can always tell when someone has a personal goal to make another person look bad. They bring out all the bad points and neglect to say anything good. Could there be even one good reason why Dr. Minnis was handed the rare "gift" unopposed?
My question to Simon is how exactly do you organize people in a party who are not only reeling from defeat but are bitter, jealous and angry? How do you organize people who feel as if they deserve your post and will destroy the entire party before they support you? How do you unify people who are hungry for power, plotting against you and stabbing you in the back? How do you not alienate yourself from people like that?
I have worked closely with Dr. Minnis and I can attest to the fact that he has always surrounded himself with positive people. Anyone who has felt alienated by him need to check themselves. Could it be that you have exhibited negativity? It is clear that Dr. Minnis does not and cannot thrive on negativity.
People often talk about charisma and engaging speakers when it comes to leadership, and that's all good, but I believe our population has become more politically mature. Politically mature people look for the kind of charisma that makes the leader more concerned about making others look and feel good than making themselves look good.
Dr. Minnis has shown his ability to be hard working, to be accountable and to communicate with the people he serves. Judging from the way he runs his constituency he is forward thinking and is quick to adapt to new and changing trends. He has shown by his own personal life that he has what it takes to make something out of nothing. He has shown, even now, that the words "quit", "walk away" and "give up" are not in his vocabulary. He is a leader who can appreciate and utilize the strengths of the positive people around him so that they can shine along with him. Those are the true signs of leadership.
I will say here and now that as a supporter of the Free National Movement and its philosophies, I have no preference for leader. I will support anyone who is chosen to lead. Whoever it is will have strengths and weaknesses. Hubert Ingraham was not perfect and neither is Hubert Minnis. As supporters we can break our leaders down or we can build them up. We can choose to work with him and win or we can fight against him and we can all lose.
-- Lorraine Gibson

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian