Last Sunday, Anglican Bishop Laish Boyd, a man of tremendous pastoral sensitivity, preached about his reaction to the devastation caused by Hurricane Matthew in Grand Bahama, where reportedly 7,000 structures have been damaged or destroyed, according to this journal.
Boyd spoke movingly of those suffering in the wake of the category four storm. He noted that, while he had booked an evening return flight back to New Providence from the hard-hit island, halfway through the day he wanted to crawl into his bed and pull the sheets over his head.
Of course, he remained throughout the day, offering encouragement and hope. It is telling of the devastation and of the reaction most of us would have, when a man of great strength and faith like the Anglican leader is shaken by what he saw.
Like Boyd, we should not retreat from hard facts and inconvenient truths following Matthew, though it may be tempting for policymakers and others to pull the sheets over their heads and ours, as well as the proverbial wool over our eyes.
We have to deal with urgent questions, like where residences and businesses should be rebuilt in Andros and Grand Bahama, especially given rising sea levels and potentially stronger and more devastating hurricanes as a result of climate change and the particular vulnerability of a far-flung island chain.
The aftermath of hurricanes, like other natural disasters, produces a fog of confusion, uncertainty and anxiety. There is often considerable misinformation and a lack of perspective and historical memory. Frustration often breeds amnesia.
We often forget the details of the aftermath of past hurricanes. Not to excuse the response of BPL by any means, but in past hurricanes it has sometimes taken nearly as long for the electrical supply to be reconnected for many consumers.
Indeed, neither BEC nor BPL should be readily excused for response times during various hurricanes.
Given the devastation of Joaquin last year, and the impact of Matthew this year on our two most populous islands, it is essential to have the sort of clarity that offers insight into the damage and effects of the recent storm, and a clearer vision in preparing for future storms.
Resilience
Cliches are the enemy of clear thinking and the need for tough and realistic conclusions. Invoking mantras like the Bahamian spirit and resilience may be fine in a given context, but such expressions can often seem pat and formulaic in the midst of suffering and paralyzing anxiety.
What do these mantras actually mean, when it comes to making philosophical and policy decisions about the role of government in the aftermath of a hurricane and how government is to fund reconstruction efforts and which efforts it should fund and should not fund?
Though the Christie administration appropriately did what any administration should have done in issuing warnings about Matthew, it seems mostly confused about dealing with the long-term effects of hurricanes.
It has not had a deep think following Joaquin on the complex of fiscal, environmental, infrastructural and other issues related to preparing for and responding to hurricanes, including the possibility of an archipelago-wide superstorm or a series of hurricanes.
We are mostly still in an ad hoc thinking mode when it comes to how hurricanes will affect The Bahamas over the course of the ensuing decades.
Given our anemic growth, perilous economic state and deficits and debt, a series of storms can push us over the brink financially and wreck public finances.
We are still reconstructing from Joaquin and have now been hit by Matthew. What might the rest of this hurricane season or next year's bring?
Fairly immediately following Matthew, Prime Minister Perry Christie floated various ideas before the press about how to pay for reconstruction efforts, though there is still no clarity on how funds are to be spent and targeted.
Who should qualify for assistance, and who does not qualify, given their income level and ability to tap into private resources? What mechanisms are in place to minimize graft in the awarding of reconstruction contracts?
Unanswered
With such broader questions still unanswered and with a lack of greater clarity on how reconstruction funds should be spent, the government will now borrow $150 million.
While Christie was, as usual, unfocused and all over the map in his communication to the House of Assembly yesterday, State Minister of Finance Michael Halkitis offered some broad outlines on how the $150 million will supposedly be spent.
Repairs to government infrastructure, as well as appropriate reconstruction aid and assistance, is necessary and urgent. But will the PLP be able to resist the great temptation in an election year for the government to use reconstruction money to award such funds to those who should be repairing or rebuilding their own homes and businesses? Many in the party are not known for resisting temptation.
There remain serious concerns about Labour and National Insurance Minister Shane Gibson being in charge of recovery and reconstruction efforts.
Christie earlier mused about a hurricane tax. Criticized for musing out loud, Christie said in the House yesterday that he was having a "dynamic conversation" with journalists. This is typical Christie baloney and nonsense. Likely, the conversation was less than dynamic and was instead incoherent rambling and confused talk by a verbose and undisciplined Christie.
Christie was not having a "dynamic conversation". He was being interviewed by journalists and should have spoken carefully and appropriately. Any "dynamic conversation" about new taxes should take place in the Cabinet, where some of his colleagues were reportedly not pleased about his talk about yet another new tax.
The dynamic conversation the country needs is about how we think about certain issues related to mitigating the nexus of the effects of hurricanes and climate change.
In his communication to the House Christie asked whether those in West End who rebuilt near the water after a previous hurricane and whose homes were damaged or destroyed again by Matthew should now rebuild in the same location, with taxpayers responsible for such rebuilding after multiple storms.
Reconstruction
The example of Crossing Rock, Abaco suggests the need for relocation of certain businesses and residences to ensure no loss of life and to appropriately ease the burden on fellow-citizens.
Stories about how our fellow-citizens fared are important. But a prime minister must add to this a focused and clear narrative of hope and reconstruction beyond anecdotes.
Christie spoke about a pastor in New Providence whose church near the waterfront was destroyed. He offered to the pastor the idea of exchanging the land on which her church was built for equally valued land away from the waterfront.
Again, Christie must stop making policy on the fly. The empathy is understandable. But when a prime minister makes such a statement it has far-reaching consequences. Will it now be the government's policy to exchange the land of possibly hundreds if not thousands of Bahamians on the waterfront throughout the archipelago with comparably valued land away from the waterfront?
Christie spoke before Matthew about the effects of rising sea levels as a result of climate change. It remains an inconvenient truth for him that he served as a handsomely paid consultant for an oil exploration company, whose success could help lead to rising sea levels, threatening many Bahamas communities.
With marine algae as the main source of oxygen for the planet, Christie's conflict of interest as an oil company consultant is even more glaring, as an oil spill in The Bahamas could affect the air we breathe.
Meanwhile, where is the voice of the opposition in the debate on reconstruction? Do not expect much from Opposition Leader Dr. Hubert Minnis, who is completely out of his depth on anything having to do with ideas or policy.
He has already squandered any moral or political authority he may have had in this debate because of his overly politicized and juvenile comments in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane and because of his rush to give thousands to Junkanoo groups while many Bahamians were still in desperate straits. Those who pretend that they can advise and restrain his worst and amateurish instincts are living in a world of make-believe.
Minnis' actions were detestable. His first and base instinct was to exploit the suffering of others in order to secure his own selfish needs. He is reminiscent of the Queen of Hearts of "Alice in Wonderland" fame as well as the self-absorbed Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who pretends to be a populist while having little regard for those whom he pretends to champion.
Minnis demonstrated yet again that he has an almost pathological lack of empathy. Throughout history, the most dangerous and worst leaders are those who lacked empathy.
The ideas for preparing for and mitigating the effects of hurricanes in an age of climate change will have to come mostly from civil society and private citizens, as the current government and opposition lack the clarity, insight and vision to lead on this front.
Many of our political leaders seem to have crawled into their comfort zones with the sheets pulled over their heads waiting for the next storm to hit, while we're still recovering from the previous storm, one in which many Bahamians are reeling still.
o frontporchguardian@gmail.com, www.bahamapundit.com.
Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian
