Dear Editor,
Without question, tourism is the number one industry of The Bahamas. After many years, I still marvel at the beauty and clarity of our waters. The Bahamas is blessed to have such an asset but we cannot claim to have created it. In fact, it seems that today, in several cases, we are trying to destroy it. However, I do not wish to focus on the environmental issues at this time - they are already well covered in the press.
On the other hand, I do wish to focus on another Bahamian asset which is something we can proudly boast to have created, namely, talent. For a population as small as ours it is astonishing to see the level and diversity of Bahamian talent that has been generated - sports and the arts are two well-known areas.
Among these talents there are also some very well-educated and articulate professionals but for most of the time this aspect of talent is not well-recognized, to the point of it even being overlooked.
Why is it that opinions and recommendations from other bodies/persons from various parts of the world are considered to be more acceptable? Input from the local talent pool has to be more valuable than input from other parts of the world - including New Zealand!
Our local people live here and know how the system works, including the practices of corruption, protectionism and cronyism. By far, they are in the best position to assess what will work and what will not work.
When value-added tax (VAT) was first introduced into the public arena, there was a great hue and cry about the adverse scenarios that would be created. It immediately caused a furor of criticism to which the government responded by saying that criticism for the sake of criticism was not acceptable and Bahamians were challenged to put forward constructive alternatives. The challenge was readily accepted and several groups put forward a variety of alternative and well-reasoned ideas.
Did the government listen? No, just like it ignored the referendum on the regularization and operation of web-shops.
Nonetheless, the government did become so concerned with the breadth of the continued criticism that it decided to hire consultants from an external source (and from a region that could not be much further away from The Bahamas).
The New Zealand consultants duly came and reviewed the government proposals but fortunately they did not "rubber-stamp" them and suggested better ways of approach. One of the criticisms outlined by the New Zealand consultants was the fact that there were far too many exemptions - in other words, there were more holes than in a lace curtain.
With the recent re-presentation of VAT, this area of exemptions seems to have been addressed by the government, as VAT will apply to almost everything.
The government in its wisdom has also recognized that to start with a VAT rate of 15 percent would not be well received and has therefore have lowered the rate to 7.5 percent. In order to offset the estimated reduced tax revenue due to the lowering of the rate, the government has decided not to reduce customs duties to the same extent as previously planned. The end net result is expected to be about the same.
How can this be? Where is the logic?
It was clearly announced that 7.5 percent VAT will be added to electricity bills. Electricity rates in The Bahamas are among the most expensive in this region of the world.
Furthermore, the corporation has one of the worst accounts receivable records when it comes to delinquencies. If BEC was run as a commercial business, it would have been in liquidation many years ago! However, if the government cannot currently collect its electricity bills then why add another 7.5 percent to the bill? It simply does not make sense.
It is publicly and widely known that there are many "protected" customers who do not have their electricity disconnected for non-payment.
In fact the BEC chairman recently and openly stated that he was leading a charge not to have the corporation carry out mass disconnections. What example does this set? Maybe when the 7.5 percent VAT levy is introduced, none of us should pay our electric bills, as we know there will be no punishment for non-payment.
This syndrome of protectionism when it comes to non-payment of any and all bills has to be changed immediately.
For a well-known company to recently say that the public leak of its outstanding electricity debt was an invasion of privacy and politically motivated is outright nonsense. What is matter with the adage of 'name and shame'?
The real problem is the fact that many of the people in this country have no shame - they really believe that they are above the law.
If the revenue from VAT is going to work in any meaningful manner then (i) the government must lead by example and stop this protectionism of the aforementioned chosen persons and (ii) reduce the level of VAT to be imposed on electricity and other basic utilities - why not try 1.5 or two percent?
As mentioned above, the reduction of VAT exceptions is a start, but by the same token a flat VAT rate does not have to be applied across the board. As a quick and easily referenced example look at the U.K. where VAT is levied at a general rate of 20 percent, however only a VAT rate of five percent is added to electricity.
Can The Bahamas not even learn from other countries?
As stated at the outset, the government of the Bahamas chooses not to recognize the constructive proposals put forward by its own people. Are we ashamed to acknowledge the skills of our own talented people?

- Fair and balanced citizen

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian