100 new homes a year for 5 years
Free daycare for single parents
20% of government contracts will go to small business.
100 new homes a year
Only 100? Surely they can do better.
According to the UBP’s own 2004 Budget Reply, the annual additions to the housing stock have been extraordinary low for some time despite steady growth in demand due to international business.
In order to compensate for the lack of new developments in during it’s terms in office, the PLP has been introducing housing projects recently at a staggering pace.
According to A piece of de rock: Providing homes for Bermudians, the following developments are planned or partially completed.
12 units at Butterfield lane
16 units at Anchorage lane
38 units at Perimeter lane
100 units at Rockaway for seniors
108 units at Harbour View Village
54 units at Westcott Lane
100 rental units at Ireland Island
96 units at Loughlands
So where the UBP’s promise last election was to provide 100 new homes a year for 5 years, the PLP has managed to match and exceed this, at least in principle, by planning and constructing 524 new homes/apartments prior to the next election, many of which may be complete should the election not be called until the full limit of the PLP’s present term.
The PLP may have been weak on promises during the campaign in the last election but you can’t really argue with results (though tardy) given that they’re looking to meet the same benchmark as set by the UBP in their own campaign.
When 500 families are suggested to have put their names on the list for homes at Loughlands alone, may I ask if the 100 new homes a year is lowball offer from the UBP to the electorate? Can they not do better?
Here’s a glaring question. Why free daycare for only single parents? Is the UBP not willing to promote assistance for stable familes as only broken families needs support? If a family of two parents still can’t make ends meet should they not also be entitled to free day care? Should all families not be able to apply for free daycare subject to a means test as opposed to only single parents?
Also, what is meant by a “means” test? Do they mean Black families only? Or restricted by income level? Or how about those who are forced to work 3 jobs as a means to be able to provide for their children and thus don’t have adequate time to properly raise their children?
So 20% of government contracts will go to small business? How do you define that? 20% of what exactly? 20% of overall value? 20% of the number of projects?
Can we not also have a more transparent bidding process that publishes the results of why specific businesses were chosen? The last thing I want to see is another massive project being assigned to a small business with very little experience in the industry simply because it’s a small business.
What will the UBP be doing to ensure that awarding of government contracts is a fair process that treats all Bermudians as equal and does not favor friends of politicians over those who truly deserve the work? Also, what kind of transparency will be awared to ensure that a contract isn’t given to a middle man simple so that they can cover up the fact that he is sub contracting to friends of politicians?
Drop the Zimbabwe references
Oh, and finally, drop the Zimbabwe References Mr. Crockwell.
“But this is not Zimbabwe where you can take property from Tucker’s Town and give it to another segment. We have to be pragmatic as we move forward.”
Let’s remember that pragmatic has multiple meanings and take into consideration Tucker’s Town’s founding before making such statements.
prag·mat·ic (prāg-māt’ĭk) Pronunciation Key
- Dealing or concerned with facts or actual occurrences; practical.
- Philosophy Of or relating to pragmatism.
- Relating to or being the study of cause and effect in historical or political events with emphasis on the practical lessons to be learned from them.
- Active; busy.
- Active in an officious or meddlesome way.
- Dogmatic; dictatorial.
- A pragmatic sanction.
- Archaic A meddler; a busybody.