Dear Editor,
Thank you for printing the final article in this series.
Now the summation. We must move toward a re-sensitivity, move toward a respect for absolute divine authority, then relative human, governmental authority -- the authority of love. As we move forward, we begin by acknowledging Martin Luther King Jr.'s lament that whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly; each man's death diminishes me. Cain had no idea that he began the process of his own psychological and physiological suicide when he committed the homicide of Abel. When our natural instinct to life predominates, when we realize the interrelatedness of all life, then we are more reluctant to diminish ourselves, consequently more willing to sustain ourselves through the sustaining of others, knowing that we are our brother's keeper. It continues by respecting the Christian truism that we are made imago dei, in God's image, and realize that from the prophetic "Thus saith the Lord" emanates the timeless, universal laws that provide a framework of ethical, moral conduct that makes all mankind safe, self-actualized and divine in his daily comportment.
Re-sensitization continues by King Zedekiah (political authority) asking the Jeremiahs (prophets) of his day -- "is there a Word from the Lord?" For whatever historical reason or excuse, regardless of why the king hardly consults with the prophet, king, prophet and priest should function in tandem. We cannot afford to import the doctrine of separation of church and state -- practicing atheistic pragmatism, not deistic governance. There must be an abiding sense of accountability of the king to God first and foremost, developed in his personal life, then demonstrated in his public life by incorporating the priestly and prophetic functions in state affairs.
Re-sensitization steadies along when the king himself performs the role as priest (Saul offering sacrifices, Jehoshaphat calling solemn assemblies in national emergencies). Our leader at any governmental period ought to know when to pray as a Solomon. Such leadership ministers to the holistic (body, mind, spirit) needs of society -- socially, spiritually, educationally, economically. The paradigm of being primarily responsible for economic prosperity is myopic, deductionistic, thus detrimental to being a "father" of the nation. The king must know when to adorn the hat of the shepherd, speaking passionately to his flock, leading to green pastures (economic prosperity), leading beside still waters (emotional security), leading in the paths of righteousness (morally). This subsuming " king, prophetic, priestly function", could catapult the much-needed re-sensitization process.
Further, the king (government, including opposition), priests/prophets (ecclesiastical body) and business community must know when to come together to triangulate nation building efforts. This builds morale and meaning in the individual, and the collective conscience of each citizen. This trifold coming together, demanding partisan political "un-clothing" and the "re-clothing" of the "I am a Bahamian first" garment, is absolutely necessary. The lack of such a roundtable of discussions, identification of deep structured problems, and the formulation of strategies indicative of a systems approach to a national development plan to combat social ills of various sorts and degrees, can only hasten our descent into a national abyss. Said Dr. King, "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."
Re-sensitization will use this triangulation to create a national development plan that transcends political governments, becomes our governmental national development constitution as it were, although successive governments may use different strategies.
Re-sensitization will mean more of a proactive and preemptive, not reactional, approach to national civility. Increase in police manpower, cars, other resources are laudable. A just and expedient judiciary is commendable. Enforcement of capital punishment perhaps? But these are all reactive, not proactive. Bahamians must combat crimes beginning with brotherly sensitivity inside each individual spirit. We love ourselves, love our brother. Hurting the brother then becomes hurting ourselves. That is a beginning, but ultimate national endeavor.
Re-sensitization begins with every man policing himself just by being a law-abiding citizen. A re-sensitization of the need to follow simple law and order is excruciatingly lacking. If there is a growing cultural disregard and disdain for authority, at least police yourself. Society has been historically centered on the major crimes and violation of laws, but we have unfortunately paid little attention to the smaller violations. We know that termites eat away at foundations. Corroding rust starts and seems small on steel, but give it time. We must re-sensitize ourselves to the importance of basic, every day, seemingly innocuous or harmless violations. For these sow the seeds of tolerance for the greater, subconscious, cultural imbedding of anarchy that blossoms into present society.
I remember vividly a staff meeting while teaching at A.F. Adderley in the mid-nineties. We had convened to discuss the gang violence that was destroying the school, threatening teacher and student safety. "Enough was Enough" was the motif. During the meeting I raised a question and made a comment that relegated me to the category of either a rebel, non-conformist, or just plain old out of touch. I challenged my colleagues to not look at the few students who were always engaging in deviant and violent gang fighting. I asked them to consider that their fighting was not always premeditated. Some of it was, but the majority of it was reactionary to unforeseen circumstances. The real problem we have on this campus, I said confidently, was not the occasional fighting. The real defiant, anti-authority, "bad" students were the ones who walk through the gate every single day, intentionally and blatantly violating uniform codes -- improper shoes, pants, excessive and forbidden accessories, no crests, tardiness to school, to class, etc.
Off course I was castigated, stared at, and my comments were disregarded. The point I was making was that there was a population that was deliberately defying school rules, practicing student anarchy on a lower, apparently insignificant level. These were the most problematic, presenting the most disrespect for, and destruction of, the system. These were the quintessential rule breakers, not the student who un-intentionally, non-premeditatedly, accidently provoked and engaged in a fight of spontaneity -- just a spur of the moment bumped into, shoes walked on, thinking it was intentional provocation, or jealousy over a guy talking to, or yelling at, his girl type stuff.
This is a good place to proffer that a re-sensitization needed to help alleviate the senseless violence in this country is to strongly recommend that our students be introduced to core human values at early ages, thus calling for a slight adjustment to the school curriculum. Personal and social adjustment classes and conflict management skills should be taught early in primary school. Bend trees while they are young. But basic respect for self, others and the properties of others must be inculcated during formal academic years.
Re-sensitization realizes that while less than 5 percent of our population engages in violent criminal behavior, there is an exponential amount who are every day, in simple but profound ways, violating our laws intentionally, defiantly, blatantly. If we are serious, then a re-sensitization would excoriate those apparent simple acts of blatant disregard for law and order. But excoriating these acts reflects one observing acts of another. How about us getting to that point when we judge, police and lawfully referee ourselves? True patriotism is adhering to cultural and moral norms, avoiding unlawful, or any other behavior to ingratiate our own needs in the moment at the expense of civility. True patriotism is demonstrated when the collective consciousness reflects the individual law-abiding proclivity, thus the individual determines the collective. The whole is not greater than the part.
In conclusion, re-sensitization informs us that in Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of Rome', the threat was not foreigners, not external, but internal. Gradual rejection of collective responsibility, gradual desensitization toward commune-ism and gradual acceptance of moral degeneration, political corruption, religious tyranny/hypocrisy and individual gratification, all led to Rome's demise. It was a gradual seed planting before the implosion, the destruction of the self by the self from within the self. Then came the accusation "Nero fiddled while Rome burned". May we all stop the fiddling, quit the finger pointing, because all incurred great loss, not Nero alone.
Re-sensitize. Love. Love, respect God as the source of absolute truth. Love yourself, then others. Cain must be Abel's keeper, for thus he keeps and cherishes himself. Remember, "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools".
Love my country.

- Dr. "B"

Dear Editor,

The time is long past for air transport officials to recognize that there is such a thing as domestic air travel in this country.
We have copied a U.S. system, which basically sees no need to segregate international and domestic flight operations. Not surprisingly, the U.S. is almost alone in the world in clinging to this protocol.
I accept that our hands are tied by convention and direct mandates from foreign governments and that we must impose stringent security screening on international travelers. But where in the rulebook does it say we must exact the same protocols for Granny going from Nassau to Long Island?
When we opened the new airport to great fanfare in 2013, we migrated the peacefully co-existing domestic and international operations into a monolith amalgamated two-pronged system - one building for U.S. departures and another for all other departures. Whether you are headed to the busiest airport in the world, London Heathrow, or simply skipping 45 miles to Andros, you are subjected to the same protocol at LPIA.
It gets worse coming back to Nassau if you happen to be embarking from a Family Island airport with just one U.S.-bound departure a day.
This must stop. Canada, which, like us, has U.S. pre-clearance facilities and a big domestic market, has specific domestic terminals. Security isn't nonexistent in domestic terminals, it's just more matched to the perceived threat levels.
We know that by far The Bahamas has more airports than any other country in the entire Caribbean. We also know that the Nassau-Freeport route is one of the busiest air corridors in the region, outmatched only by the Trinidad to Tobago air bridge. There, they carve out domestic sections, and the security personnel are more concerned with stopping drunk fliers from boarding aircraft than with whether their beverage flasks have three ounces of liquid or less.
Imagine being asked for your passport in order to board a flight from Nassau to Cat Island. The driver's license was eventually accepted as proof of ID, but with the ticket agent admonishing the passenger: "You can't trust road traffic with these driver's license, so make sure bring your passport next time".
The agent, though insultingly wrong, was perhaps doing the passenger a favor, because moments later in the security line to get into the boarding area, an officer was asking again to see a passport, something he had rightly demanded from the Canada-bound passengers in the same line.
If we had a domestic terminal, this would fall by the wayside. And it would probably make domestic air travel much cheaper. The airport charges operators a stiff rent to use the new facilities. Some of the rent is probably needed to help cover the cost of all those security officers demanding passports of Family Islanders trying to go home and Nassauvians trying to escape for the weekend.
Once you get inside the departure hall, it's a half-mile walk over to where the domestic terminal used to be, because they still park the airplanes for domestic flights in the same old place.
The government hasn't said what its master plan is for developing the airport, but here's a thought: Why not renovate the old building and make it a terminal for domestic flights only? It could be a fast-in-fast-out affair, where the airline need only ensure you have a booking and then send you on your way with a cursory security screening; not the strip-to-your-bare-feet shakedown that the international travelers get.
It should be the same coming back. At Family Island airports, build an impenetrable security wall to segregate the domestic from the international outbound passengers, just as you are required to do with inbound international passengers, who must present themselves to customs and immigration.
The only thing on the minds of arriving domestic passengers should be whether Miss Suzie's crab bag burst and the crabs are swarming the conveyor belt, as has happened recently.
The solution must be better baggage acceptance procedures, not simply to mix up some dough to go with all that crab fat.

- The Graduate

Dear Editor,

Call 911!!! That's right, Editor, call the police!!! What's the matter? Well, I'll tell you -- there's a fight going on in one of our schools!!!
Remember the good old days, Editor? A fight was just that -- a fight -- fists and legs flailing about, no guns, no knives, just a good old rumble. Nowadays that is not the case. These children today are getting out of hand. These fights are so dangerous now, that it is not enough to call a security guard to break up the fight. The school authorities have to call the police to deal with the matter. The previous PLP administration saw fit to station the police at our schools. There was no need to call central. An officer should have already been there. I prayed to God that, that police officer was well armed, or else he/she would have found himself/herself at a disadvantage.
I don't know the policy position of this new FNM administration as far as stationing police in our schools.
But how did this whole imbroglio evolve to fighting with guns and knives? The students who have these weapons must make it a habit to bring them to school with them. And I suspect that these same students cannot resist the temptation to reveal to other students that they are "packing heat". News spreads, and soon enough most of the students in the school know who not to "fool with". Can you believe that, Editor? So, tell me, Editor, where are the prefects in these schools? Where are the students who participate in the police cadets program? I am certain that if news is circulating about these nefarious culprits, then they too should get wind of that same information. I was told by two police officers that the police even have "pimps" in the schools as part of their secret police cadets programs. Where are they?
What's my point? Well, the prefects, the cadets and the secret cadets should be able to identify these students who are carriers of dangerous weapons even before the fights start, thereby avoiding a situation where the police have to be called to diffuse volatile situations. The guilty students, who are only looking for trouble, could be charged and removed from the schools and disciplined.
And, Editor, it is my humble opinion that these prefects, cadets and secret cadets should be paid on a regular basis for participating in maintaining the peace in their respective schools. If they were not motivated before, they would certainly be motivated if they know that they will be paid for their services. Come on, Editor, let's put these students to work and start ridding our schools of these young criminals. However, a word to these student police -- your education always comes first. It is paramount.
Thank you for your valuable time and space in your newspaper.
- Marvin G. Lightbourn

Dear Editor,

The discussion around the proposed National Health Insurance (NHI) scheme brings to mind the now-iconic Wendy's television commercial in which three elderly ladies were served a hamburger. Admiring the big, fluffy bun on the outside, they opened the bun to find a burger so small that one of them exclaimed, "Where's the beef?"
The government's planned NHI scheme seems to beg a similar question, that is, "Where's the value?"
When in opposition, the present government bombarded the media constantly, pointing out the inadequacies of the proposed NHI program: poorly planned, inadequately funded, ill-suited for our healthcare needs, etc.
Bahamians may be forgiven for believing that once elected, the new government would take steps to retrench and rethink its approach to healthcare.
It seems inexplicable that now that they are no longer in the opposition, members of this government not only want to continue with an NHI funded primary care program, but also expand the program to include specialty care. This, at a time when by its own admission, "the cupboard is bare"!
Let me be clear, the physicians of The Bahamas are committed to the provision of quality healthcare for all Bahamians.
We welcome any fiscally sustainable plan that will achieve this, but the current plan does not meet that criteria.
However, since the government seems determined to move forward with an NHI scheme in some form -- along with the inevitable increases in taxation that this will bring to bear -- the important question to address is: "How can NHI best provide value for the Bahamian people?"
To arrive at an answer we must first acknowledge two truths.
First, the NHI scheme in its present form provides absolutely nothing not presently available in the public health sector.
Yes, it is true that our public healthcare system is beset by management issues, excessive red tape and misuse of resources. However, upwards of 90% of the healthcare needs of Bahamians are accessible -- right now -- through the public healthcare system.
The proposed NHI scheme will not add a single service, test, screening or care opportunity that is not presently available to the Bahamian public.
So why add millions of dollars of additional debt, new layers of bureaucracy, and opportunities for mismanagement of a service that presently exists?
Second, even the most ardent collectivists have abandoned the idea that National Health Insurance can provide the amenities made available by private health insurance.
There are ample examples around the world to debunk this theory. So the discussion of an NHI scheme attempting to equal the amenities of private insurance is a moot point.
With the above in mind, what is the best way forward for National Health Insurance?
If we are going to have a National Health Insurance with its accompanying increase in taxes (which almost always happens), why not use this money to provide needed medical supplies and services that have to be paid for out-of-pocket in the public service?
That is, NHI would fund such things as vascular grafts for patients on dialysis, comprehensive cancer care, pacemakers, pediatric heart surgery, extended care, including rehabilitation for stroke victims, etc.
NHI for services not presently available in the public sector will enhance our healthcare service, fully utilize our present infrastructure, add minimal debt, remove the need for cookouts to fund medical care, and would receive buy-in from all stakeholders, especially physicians.
So to answer the question, "NHI, where's the value?"... The value is in providing medical services that are urgently needed but not presently available.
If we must move forward with this concept, let it be in a way that truly benefits Bahamians and adds value to our standard of living.
Hopefully, this government will listen to and execute the plans of our exceptional professionals, and not go searching the globe for foreign consultants.
Or worse, attempt to implement some ill-conceived, harebrained scheme meant to gain political traction, but instead causes incalculable suffering for the Bahamian people.

- Sy Coolidge Pierre, MD
president, Medical Association of The Bahamas