ATTORNEY General Ryan Pinder confirmed yesterday the Davis administration will bring an end to the "vexing" issue of inequality between men and women regarding the transfer of citizenship through the proposed Nationality Bill 2022.

During his contribution to the 2022-2023 Budget debate, Mr Pinder said it was “irrefutable” that Article 13 of the Constitution gives Parliament the ability to make provisions for the acquisition of citizenship of The Bahamas.

He maintained that advancing equality when it comes to transmission of citizenship is explicitly permitted through the legislative mechanisms of Parliament, adding the government intended on using that avenue to go forward.

“We will advance appropriate legislation to finally bring equality to Bahamian men and women in the transmission of citizenship to their children,” Mr Pinder said in the Senate.

“An initial draft has been prepared and commented on internally and we look to advance consultation after bringing to Cabinet and ultimately tabling in Parliament.”

He continued: “And for those who may raise questions as to this legislative action, let me be be clear, the Constitution in Article 13 provides that Parliament may make provision for the acquisition of citizenship of The Bahamas by persons who do not become citizens of The Bahamas by virtue of the provisions of this chapter in the Constitution. It’s irrefutable, plain reading of the law.

“Advancing equality when it comes to transmission of citizenship is explicitly permitted through the legislative mechanisms of Parliament and we intend on using that avenue to go forward... We are brave, be brave my colleagues, be brave.”

In April, Mr Pinder said the Davis administration planned to scrap the draft 111-page Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill 2018, saying while it addressed a number of different issues, the government is of the view that it was a better approach to tackle matters individually.

However, some of the concepts of the Minnis administration’s draft will be used in a new bill, Mr Pinder said at the time. He also maintained his view that it was best to bring changes regarding Bahamian citizenship through legislation at Parliament, noting two previously failed referendums to change the constitution in this regard.

It is the government’s intention to bring legislation to allow both Bahamian men and women to pass on citizenship in any circumstance.

“Well, we have failed twice to change the constitution and it is an important element of equality of our people that they see themselves equal among each other and if that means doing it by legislation then that’s what it means,” Mr Pinder said when asked at the time to respond to critics who are against changing the law by way of legislation in Parliament.

Mr Pinder further shrugged off the possibility of the government facing legal action from people who may see the changes as unconstitutional.

“If they take us to court, they take us to court. Everybody takes the government to court these days. (It) doesn’t mean they’re right. You clearly stated that the constitution provides the avenue to provide citizenship that is not covered within the constitution, which is what this is doing.”

The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill 2018, drafted under former Law Reform Commissioner Dame Anita Allen features expanded grounds for the refusal of citizenship under the constitution, and registration and naturalisation under the law to include terrorism, human and drug trafficking, as well as gang-related activities. The draft has drawn commentary from both the political and civic arenas.

These issues are derived primarily from articles 7 and 9 of the constitution; but aren’t addressed therein or by later amendments.

The draft bill would have granted individuals in both these categories — born outside of The Bahamas to a Bahamian mother and born inside The Bahamas to two non-Bahamian parents — the “right of abode” or the right to live in The Bahamas while a minor, up to the age of 18.

NATIONAL Security Minister Wayne Munroe has defended the 14-day timeframe given to squatters to vacate Crown Land, saying no one will be allowed to own land that belongs to the government.

Last Friday, Mr Munroe issued the warning after a family was discovered to be living in the National Pine Forest.

Since then, the Davis administration has received some backlash for its approach to handling the issue compared with squatters in places such as shanty towns.

Mr Munroe stressed Crown Land belongs to the government of The Bahamas compared with private land where the illegal communities are located.

“If you permit people to squat on your property after 12 years, they will own it, that’s what the law of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas says,” Mr Munroe said. “Shanty towns, from what I am to understand, are on leased land from private homeowners.”

Mr Munroe explained that the issue the government has with shanty towns is the construction of illegal buildings.

“We don’t own privately owned land; the people do own Crown Land. And as we are instructed, we will not permit people to squat on public land,” Mr Munroe said.

He said that it amazes him that some people think it’s acceptable to occupy any piece of property they like.

Recently after touring acres of deforested areas in a National Pine Forest ride along in the Carmichael Road area, the National Security minister discovered a family had been living there illegally in a school bus.

Yesterday, he told reporters the Department of Social Services was made aware of the situation.

He said it is now for the family to seek assistance.

“You cannot force people to get help. It will be available if they take it up. If they don’t take it up, then they will not take it up. But they, like all other persons trespassing, will have to move,” he added.

Mr Munroe said the Royal Bahamas Defence Force will be in charge of executing the plan of clearing illegal activities on Crown Land.

THE official opposition wants to see a full report detailing money spent on furniture and decor at an ambassador's residence in Belgium.

Last week, Labour and Immigration Minister Keith Bell revealed in Parliament that more than $1m in total had been spent.

This included monthly accommodations in a Brussels hotel for ambassador Maria O’Brien at a cost of $20,000 per month, while the furniture and decor cost the government $550,000.

Mr Pintard told The Tribune he found it “most unfortunate” the way that it was presented in the House.

Mr Bell had tabled what appeared to be an itemised list with costs. However, Mr Pintard has noted the document was of poor quality.

 “Certainly we’ve asked in the House of Assembly that the allegations made by Minister Keith Bell that it is very important to the opposition for the government to lay the report on that spending,” Mr Pintard said. “Mr Henfield who made a comment he was unaware of it.

“What we do know is that an ambassador is unable to basically approve those spendings. So, I just found it most unfortunate the way that it was presented in the House, but we would like to get a full report on it to know those figures are in fact accurate because they are exceptionally high, but we just want to get the full scope of it before we make any detailed statements.”

The Marco City MP has previously said ambassadors are unable to approve funding and questioned who approved the spending.

Meanwhile, former Foreign Affairs Minister Darren Henfield had said the level of spending was “indefensible.”

For his part, former Prime Minister Dr Hubert Minnis last week said Mr Bell had been “totally disingenuous” in making the accusations. He added that Brussels was an expensive place and the ambassador would not have acted outside of established protocols by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

He said ambassadors did not have access to money. He also said ambassadors live in hotels until proper permanent accommodations are found. These hotels, he said, must have a certain standard of security among other things.

Mr Pintard also noted another point of interest is looking at the embassies not just in Europe or in the UK, but also in the United States.

“What has been the going rate? Are there instances where persons have been provided with $20,000 or $22,000 a month in terms of accommodation? We want to see the figures for those persons right now oversees. Those persons during our period, fine, as well as the period before,” he said.

“We’re hearing that over the course of the last 10 years there have been some exceptionally high figures that most of us are unfamiliar with, including up to today and so we want the government to be very transparent in making the information available for the period leading up to 2017, 2021 and the period we are now. We would like to see what those expenses are. What it would do is give us a rounded picture but we are concerned about what this matter has now brought to light because again persons are sending information of incredibly high billings right up to today in embassies.”

When I heard Labour and Immigration Minister Keith Bell accuse the Minnis administration of the "indiscriminate callous hemorrhage" of the public purse to buy extravagant furnishings and decor for an ambassador's apartment in Europe, I was speechless for a brief moment, recovering just in time to utter a warranted 'Well mudda ..."

He revealed an astounding $550,000 was spent on excessive items such as a set of middle chairs that cost nearly $40,000; a rug at $18,475; a mirror at $14,000; a mahogany scroll at $10,000; a queen-size bed in Shambley damask white orchard print fabric at the cost of approximately $12,000 and a Duke polished steel mirror for $14,000.

That the items were being bought as part of a renovation of the ambassador’s apartment was one thing. However, when Bell said the official (whom he never did name) stayed in an expensive hotel at $20,000 per month, I was silent for another brief spell.

So the furnishing at $550,000 and the hotel stay racked up more than $1 million in costs.

It was quite an eye-opening contribution that Bell made during his contribution to the 2022/2023 budget debate.

What type of theme were the decorators going for?

Who were they decorating for, Indiana Jones?

Just looking at some of the items makes one wonder, at such astronomical prices, do these items have superpowers?

Take, for example, the rug at $18,475.00. Did anyone inspect it to see if it was an actual “flying carpet”? 

What piqued my curiosity was the $14,000 Duke stainless steel mirror.

For a $14,000 mirror, I think the mirror should let us all know who the fairest MP of them all is, the three and four balls for the day, the weather report as well as the traffic report, and what’s on the TV tonight.

Those are the questions I want to be answered; please spare me the political posturing and pontificating from both sides.

Those expenditures were obscene and grossly abused the public purse, in my opinion.

Hopefully, the current administration will eliminate this type of wastage, no longer burdening the public purse and leaving the voting populous speechless again.

Until next week, I’m off to start my new carpentry course; I must know how to design and build $14,000 mirrors and tables. I’m in the wrong profession, I think.