Milkman short on deliveries?

According to a recent interview with UBP chairman Shawn Crockwell for The Royal Gazette, the UBP has outlined a few more promises to go along with their pandering to the taxi drivers.

     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?

 

Free daycare

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?

 

Government Contracts

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.

Via dictionary.com:

prag·mat·ic   (prāg-māt’ĭk)  Pronunciation Key
adj.  

  1. Dealing or concerned with facts or actual occurrences; practical.
  2. Philosophy Of or relating to pragmatism.
  3. 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.
  4. Archaic
    1. Active; busy.
    2. Active in an officious or meddlesome way.
    3. Dogmatic; dictatorial.

n.  

  1. A pragmatic sanction.
  2. Archaic A meddler; a busybody.

Comments

comments

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by . Bookmark the permalink.

4 thoughts on “Milkman short on deliveries?

  1. I like the fairness you display on this topic – the UBP needs to get their collective heads out of the clouds and propose realistic, affordable, and most important Achievable goals to benefit Bermuda as a whole!
    …daycare… will this be viewed as another ‘good reason’ for single mom’s to have more children? Virtually all young families would benefit from gov run daycare, but at what cost?
    Maybe the UBP should look at some type of childcare grant that will be repayable if and when a single mom and or family unit achieve such means. On the other hand, a simple grant for the exclusive use of providing daycare for ‘working moms’ would keep the gov out of the daycare business… let private enterprise do the business and the gov provide assistance, where necessary for the betterment of Bermuda.
    cerp

  2. I agree,keep the gov out of the daycare business…but also keep the PLP gangster govt. out of the Tourism,health care,transport,and every other business scam they have corrupted .
    They can’t steal our money fast enough!
    Via dictionary.com:
    kleptocracy (root: rule by thieves) is a government that extends the personal wealth and political power of government officials and the ruling class (collectively, kleptocrats) at the expense of the population.
    Kleptocracies are often only way-stations on the road to fascism or socialism.

  3. I think you are giving the present Government too much credit under “Providing homes for Bermudians”. In 9 years, they have only managed to provide 220 units. 96 will be available in the next 6-12 months (Loughlands) and 208 are not even started. So you might criticise the UBP for their pledge of 100 new homes a year but it is FAR AND AWAY better than the record of the present Government.

  4. Bob,
    Sorry, but why should I hold a pledge from the UBP up any higher than the pledge from the PLP?
    208 may not yet have been started, but they’ve got until the next election to get them finished to match and exceed the UBP’s pledge.
    I’m criticising the UBP for their past plans based upon the PLP having pledged to meet similar (whether they do or not is still to be proven) along with their future plans for the coming election.
    I’m sorry, but I don’t believe 100 homes a year is enough. I will criticize both the UBP and the PLP for making such lowball pledges in the next election, though judging by the last election I won’t hold my breath for the PLP to make any sort of measurable pledges

Leave a Reply to sal Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *