I want to thank you for inviting me here today.

I think that this is a red-letter day in the history of our international trade.  Last week on 15th October, the government of The Bahamas with 14 other Caricom and Cariforum countries signed the Economic Partnership Agreement or EPA with the European Union. I take personal pride in having driven this public policy. The failed CSME debate undoubtedly led to an easier ride for this present administration on this matter. The present administration owes a debt of gratitude to its predecessors in office on this one.

The point is that I have been an advocate and our party has supported the view that we need to integrate our economy more fully into the world economy.  Our position is therefore vindicated.

It was the Progressive Liberal Party who made the Cabinet decision in 2006 that we would make a goods and services offer to conclude the Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union.

We raised the alarm in 2007 when a spokesman for the government and the Minister of State for Finance indicated that they were not inclined to sign the EPA and needed eight months to study the issue.  Eight months from October 2007 when that statement was made would have meant that the deadline of 31st December to sign on or face increased tariffs into Europe would have passed.  The government had no choice but to sign or face the collapse of the crawfish industry as we knew it, and we told them so.

The question of whether we should or should not sign has long been impatient of debate.  The country’s economy is already significantly internationalized and open.  We were living a fiction in many ways that we could wrap ourselves in a cocoon, and promote economic policies that would on the surface appear to be helping Bahamians but in the end, many of them did more damage.

We see by the failure to act quickly the damage now caused by not privatizing BTC and the continued inefficiencies in the telecommunications sector and across a whole range of services. The BTC privatization was already settled when we left office and it confounds me why there is this continued delay and continued waste of money in further study.

We see the damage wrought to our economy in the price inefficiencies that manifest themselves across a whole range of goods that are sold to the Bahamian consumer at prices that are too high.

The one issue that we will continue to have to monitor and that may be an exception to the wholesale plunge into free trade may be the issue of food security.

You just have to remember that when the events of 11th September 2001 took place, the borders of our major trading partner were shut for a week and this led to the fear that the country would run out of food.  Therefore, there may well be other reasons having to do with our national security that may force us to accept some inefficiencies in food production so as to buttress our food security.  The experts should study the issue and revert to us.

Indeed, one wonders what all the hullabaloo was about with these multilateral trading agreements, arguably coming from those professionals who benefit today the greatest from the present internationalized economy of The Bahamas.  The arguments in favour of isolationism seemed short sighted and unbalanced. One wondered whether or not the critics of this agreement actually read the EPA agreement itself.

Of course, the great bubagaboo for our public policy has been the issue of immigration.  In this regard, we have two immigration problems: the one of illegal migration by low-end workers coming from Haiti and to a lesser extent from Cuba as refugees on the way to the United States.  Then there is the problem of the high-end professionals that come to The Bahamas and are perceived in certain circles as taking the jobs of Bahamians.

During the debate on the Caricom Single Market and Economy, there was a particular fear and then disdain for the prospect of workers coming from the Caricom region to The Bahamas, despite that the fact that Caricom nationals were already here and despite the evidence that we cannot do without them to run the economy.  The question raised was whether Bahamian professionals could compete with their Caricom professional counterparts.  This argument was raised despite the fact that The Bahamas has been supplying professional workers to other Caricom countries for over four decades, and that there are Bahamian professionals who now work in the Caricom region. I thought it was prejudice more than anything else that blinded us to certain realities.

Clearly, different policies have to be designed to deal with the two different immigration issues.  The critics tried by sleight of hand, and a wink and a nod to bind the problem of illegal Haitian migration to The Bahamas with the issue that professionals have with those foreign professionals whose are needed for the management of our trades and services in the economy.

I have made certain suggestions with regard to Haitian migration: the need to collect intelligence in Haiti to anticipate that flow of migrants to our country; the need to stop the flow at the other end of the country; the need for orderly recruitment in Haiti; the need for investment in Haiti.  All of these are at one time or another scoffed at, and they are certainly ignored.  However, I am right and until we do it or some combination of these things, there will be no relief on this issue.

The question of professionals coming to The Bahamas is a slightly different issue.  We knew as a government that when the investment projects began to pile up, many investors were worried about where the manpower was going to come from to man all the projects that would come on stream.  This included not only the demand for managers of the projects but artisans to build the projects.  There was a serious labour shortage anticipated and actual in the country.

My view was there was no need to panic in the face of this obvious need, or slow down the economy until the labour pool was available. It was all a matter of the design of public policy and its execution.  You had to have a policy that ensured that the first benefits of the job in the economy went to Bahamians. That is simple enough.

The CSME critics and the now EPA critics argue that signing onto these agreements would obviate the need for the present immigration controls.  Certainly, that was not the case in the CSME because we proposed a reservation against the free movement of people.  However, even if we agreed to that clause, there was a legal and regulatory regime that had to be followed, and it would not have meant the wholesale migration of professionals into The Bahamas.  A similar red flag went up in the discussions over the EPA, when someone suggested that Polish vendors would under the EPA be able to come to The Bahamas and set up in the straw market. No such provision exists or would have been allowed.  The EPA is clear that the immigration strictures would still apply even after we settled on to services side of the agreement.

I need to make the point here that I also made during the CSME debate and that is that the work permit regime in The Bahamas does not stop anyone from coming to The Bahamas to work. The work permit regime is announced as a policy to protect Bahamians but the way it works, it is largely a  revenue raising measure, earning in excess of 20 million dollars a year for the country, and with this year’s increased fees it may net even more.

Further, as regards Caricom nationals, most of them work for the government and pay no work permit fees.  It is also clear that if they are withdrawn from the country the education system in the family islands could collapse as we know it.

But as you know, I paid a heavy political price for the folly of being wise where ignorance is bliss.

Please let me make it clear that I do not believe in sticking my finger in the wind to determine where the currents are blowing. I believe that if you are paid to lead, then you must lead.

Our countrymen and women must learn how to benefit from the opportunity to further integrate into the world economy.  The wealth enhancing opportunities are legion.

Today is also an important opportunity to address the question of the economy.  In between watching the contest between Senator Barak Obama and Senator John McCain to see who will lead the United States after 20th January 2009, we are watching the credit markets and stock markets in the United States.  The US, Europe, the Antipodes and Asia have all responded to the crisis by taking the measures that were anathema to the creed of the free market: in fact nationalizing the banks in those countries to allow the credit markets to stabilize and bring confidence back to those countries.

We as a country are very much on the sidelines, save and except that our country is now suffering from the down turn of the major economies. There is a drop in the tourist numbers and the expected drop in foreign direct investment that has led the Central Bank of The Bahamas to warn people not to borrow and to defer all unnecessary expenditure.

The government has announced some social measures to try to ease the burden of the poorest in the country.  I do not regard them as satisfactory and I do not believe that people are being treated with the necessary respect in the dispensation of the social support but that is another matter. It is clear that the Prime Minister needs to address this in the House in a comprehensive manner instead of the piecemeal partisan political approach that he has taken so far.

What I am concerned about is whether or not small businesses in this country are able to get the credit they need in order to continue to operate.  From looking at the figures of the Central Bank to June 2008, it would seem on the face of it that there should be no problem with credit. The liquidity is up at 300 million or more and the external foreign currency reserves at 700 million or so.  But the anecdotal story may be somewhat different from that rosy picture. I hope that this is an issue that those who are charged with the responsibility of monetary and fiscal policy will investigate.

If you move along our streets, you will see one small shop after another.  Clearly, this is the main engine of the economy and they need to get capital to keep going.

Further, there is a need for a more vigourous tourism programme than the one just announced to combat the malaise that we see in that sector.   While some of the measures announced by the Minister of Tourism are interesting, it is clear that those alone will not be sufficient to push us forward in the times of trouble.

I think that those of us who believe in a mixed economy of public and private sector investments, and partnerships and some government regulation have been vindicated by the recent events.  You will always have to have some government regulation.  The orthodoxy of non-intervention by government is now replaced by a new creed: “you must do what you must.”  My concern however that is even the great United States is risking bankrupting itself by this wholesale plunge into the business of banking with no end in sight.

But as former Prime Minister P.J. Patterson of Jamaica once told me as he faced the meltdown of the mortgage houses in Jamaica and had to form FINSAC to take over all their debts. A great supporter said to him: “Prime, all I know is when I go to the bank, I want my money.”

I think in light of all I have said that the Government ought to consider taking special measures to ensure that the Oasis properties in Freeport are opened including buying and developing if it is necessary to put people back to work.

These are a few thoughts on where we are today.  It is as usual an honour to be here.  I hope I have challenged the usual Bahamian orthodoxies here today.  I have no fear myself of the recession, although I feel the pain that everyone else feels particularly being an Opposition politician who is unemployed.  The fact is we are reminded in the Bible that there will be seven years of famine and seven years of plenty.  Those who served with me in the Cabinet think that we did a pretty good job during our five years of plenty in preparing this country for the seven years of famine by storing up the necessary grain for us to make it through.  It is one of life's fortunes or misfortunes depending on how you see it that we did not get the chance to shepherd us through this bad period but there will always another time for us.

I hope you will invite me again.

Thank you very much.