COMMUNICATION TO THE CONSTITUENCIES COMMISSION

BY

BRADLEY B. ROBERTS M.P.

October 22, 2001

In the time that has elapsed since our last meeting the number of registered voters has increased to 116,805 as of October 19, 2001. A very substantial part of this increase can be attributed to the voters' belief that they had to register by the 29th September. Although this was generated by the misleading information that the Prime Minister gave in June in a radio broadcast that "in any event" persons had to register by the 29th September. In the past three weeks this has not been corrected sufficiently by the Parliamentary Commissioner because people have been misled into believing that they could not register after the 29^th September.

I have therefore to request that this Commission request the Minister to direct the Parliamentary Commissioner to publicise that Registration continues and that Registration will continue without interruption up to the day before the Writs of Election are issued.

I have also to renew my request for the provision of a mobile registration facility to be provided which is bound to produce a higher registration as was accomplished by the practice of the Parliamentary Commissioner's attendance at special business houses to register persons which was engaged early in the registration process.

I wish to draw attention to the following recommendations which I made in previous communications to the Commission which have not been acted upon. I regard these suggestions as entirely non-political which would serve to justify public confidence in our process, reflect fairness, be democratic in its recommendations as well as quasi judicial in its mandate which is required by our Constitution. I believe that we ought to act Constitutionally in these matters and be seen to do so.

I therefore submit the following recommendations to the Commission to be formally accepted or rejected by it:

1. The Parliamentary Commissioner gives more publicity by Radio to the fact that Registration continues. That he also provide a mobile unit on a daily basis throughout New Providence on an equitable basis.

2. The number of voters in New Providence Constituencies shall be as near as practicable 4000 with the spread at roughly 3600 to 4400 keeping in mind at this stage that these numbers are estimates. The same is true of Grand Bahama where I agree the number per Constituency ought to be near the New Providence numbers.

3. Socio-economic groups of both categories of Bahamians should as far as possible be kept together, and communities ought not to be separated but kept together. This consideration hardly arises in the South Eastern, South and South Western Constituencies in New Providence.

4. Main Roads and Side Streets ought to be used equally in arriving at the 4 boundaries of each Constituency, but the main consideration ought to be that the numbers be as near as practicable.

5. In order to remove any accusations of bias which may affect the role played by the Speaker and in an effort to make the Speaker's Chairmanship of this Committee as objective as possible, it is recommended that no change be made in the boundaries of the Constituency which the Speaker represents -Garden Hills.

6. The Commission ought to act expeditiously and recommend to the Prime Minister that at least 3 months should elapse between the Adoption of the Committee's recommendations by the House and Election Day.

7. Consistent with the Prime Minister's views stated in 1992 that he would not wish to see the cutting of boundaries "in the hands of my Party's government after the next election" invite the Prime Minister to indicate in advance that he does not propose to invoke his powers under Article 70 (4) of the Constitution to make any modification to the Report of the Commission except technical amendments which do not change any recommendations.

8. In the event of boundary changes the Commission ought to formulate provisional recommendations and invite public comment in any affected constituency. In this connection, I note the announcement of The Speaker to the public that comments are to be invited from the public to the Commission on boundary changes by Friday 26 October. While the minority agrees with this position, I am unaware of any decision by the Commission to invite any such proposals. It heightens the minority's concern that the decision making with regard to this Commission is taking place elsewhere. In any event since no proposals by the Commission have been published upon what it is the public is being asked to comment. The Commission therefore needs to make such a decision to invite public comment including the modalities of such comment.

9. Not less than 50 voters in any affected Constituency may be permitted to make representation with regard to any provisional recommendations, and a representative number may appear before the Commission.

10. All Political Parties represented in Parliament ought to be requested to submit to the Commission their views as to how boundaries ought to be re-drawn with maps and explanations.

11. The Commission ought to be aware of a fundamental unfairness to both the incumbent Member of Parliament and the constituents in a particular constituency if boundary changes are made arbitrarily and capriciously and without regard to law. Our democracy will suffer if a representative is a good representative for a particular area and that area is shifted out from under him/her just before election time by a boundary change motivated by reasons other than law or fairness. What incentive then is there for a representative to help his constituents? Looked at it from another way, there appears to be an implied right of a constituent to be able to sanction an incumbent or to reward that incumbent for the work done or the lack of work done. That right is undermined to the detriment of our democracy if by a simple boundary change, the voters are unable to express their true opinions on that incumbent.

I have studied the provisional recommendations of the FNM for new Constituencies in New Providence. I have a few suggestions to make with regard to the boundaries suggested for the Southern half of New Providence, in particular Garden Hills which should remain the same, Holy Cross which divides Nassau Village un-necessarily, creates a new Constituency which may have the effect of creating constituencies of well less than 4000 voters.

I have the strongest objection to the destruction of the Fox Hill community by placing the historically proper parts of Fox Hill into the Montagu constituency, which for reasons known to all Bahamians is a racial enclave of one party persuasion. I apprehend, the gutting of Fox Hill is being proposed for reasons other than fairness or the requirements of the Constitution. Polling divisions #1 & #2 of Montagu are the heart of the old original settlement of Fox Hill known as Congo Town. They belong naturally as a part of the Fox Hill community. Polling Division #1 of the existing Fox Hill contains St. Anselm' s Church, the Sandilands Primary School and the Fox Hill Post Office. These are a natural part of the Fox Hill community. As the majority now proposes it, the only part of the original Fox Hill that will be left is the Fox Hill parade. Clearly, the proposal of the majority borders on unlawful and is most certainly unfair.

Equally strong is my objection to the dilution of the fundamental concept, to which the F. N. M. gives lip service, of one man one vote in the 8 Constituencies in the Northern half of" New Providence by reducing 8 Constituencies to 7.

It has been agreed by all Parties to follow the Constitution that the Constituencies ought to be in the words of the Constitution "so far as is reasonably practicable be the same". If this is not so we' will be acting unconstitutionally. If we agree that 4000 is the norm I suggest that anything between 3600 and 4400 is reasonable.

The boundaries suggested by the F. N. M. ignore the fact that the majority of the people in these 8 Constituencies register late, some at the last moment. Even so the 18-year and over population according to the 2000 Census is as follows:

Fort Charlotte - 4486

Bain Town - 4733

Grants Town - 5061

St. Cecelia - 4468

Englerston - 4106

Centreville - 4787

Shirlea - 4740

St. Margaret - 4547

…a total of 36,938: Divided into 8 Constituencies the population average is 4,617: divided into 7 Constituencies it is 5,276. There is therefore no justification to take one Constituency away from that area of New Providence. It ought to be obvious to everybody that there are thousands more to be registered in this area.

I have attached hereto a schedule which describes the boundaries of 24 Constituencies in New Providence. Although I do not generally disagree with the boundaries in the Southern half of New Providence once 8 Constituencies are created in the Northern half of New Providence between Fort Charlotte and St. Margaret this makes it necessary to abolish the proposed new Constituency of Pinewood in the South.

The opportunity has also been taken to correct the Fox Hill boundaries to return the Fox Hill community to Fox Hill. The same is true of the Nassau Village community in Holy Cross where no change is recommended.

In Fort Charlotte, Shirlea and St. Margaret consideration has been given to those areas of New Providence in particular Highland Park, Centreville, Shirley Heights, Buen Retiro and Blair where lots were originally not sold to persons of colour.

These white enclaves have been diluted to some extent over time but all remain substantially what they were intended to be. The Commission ought to be conscious of their existence and ensure that they not be used in any particular Constituency to influence the out-come of any election as they have been sought to be used in Fort Charlotte, Fox Hill and Centreville.

SCHEDULE

The Following Configuration of Boundaries is suggested. Results are based on the 1997 General Election in these Polling Divisions.

1. MONTAGU -P.D. Nos.1/2 of 2 West of Adderley Street, & 3 to 10 together with 1/2 of Yamacraw 6.

FNM 2092 PLP 874

2. FOX HILL P.D. 1 & 3 to 9 & 12; Malcolm Creek 4; & Montagu 1.

FNM 2114 PLP 1880

3. ELIZABETH -Yamacraw P.D. 1 to 5 and 7 to 9; and Malcolm Creek 2 & 3.

FNM 1676 PLP 1351

4. YAMACRAW: Malcolm Creek - P.D. 1, 5 to 10 & 1/2 of Yamacraw 6.

FNM 1550 PLP 970

5. HOLY CROSS No Change recommended to Boundaries.

FNM 1848 PLP 1517

6. MARATHON -P.D.1, 3 & 5 to 9 and Fox Hill 2, 10 & 11

FNM 2209 PLP 1138

7. SOUTH BEACH-P. D. 1 to 7 & 10 and Bamboo Town 2 & 9.

FNM 1697 PLP 1534

8.BAMBOO TOWN- P. D. 1 & 3 to 8 & 10 and Golden Gates 1 & 4.

FNM 2248 PLP 1200

9. KENNEDY -No Change recommended to Boundaries.

FNM 1693 PLP 1849

10. GOLDEN GATES- P.D. 2,3,5 to 10 and Blue Hills 4 & 5 and Carmichael 1, 2 & 4.

FNM 2384 PLP 1807

11. CARMICHAEL -P .D. 3, 5 to 10 and South Beach 8 & 9 and Adelaide 9.

FNM 1957 PLP 1294

12. ADELAIDE P.D. 1 & 3 to 8.

FNM 1714 PLP 1083

13. DELAPORTE P.D. 1, 2, 4 & 6 to 9 Fort Charlotte 11 & Adelaide 2.

FNM 2071 PLP 1041

14. BLUE HILLS -P-.D. 1 & 6 to 11.

FNM 1271 PLP 703

15. MT. MORIAH -P..D. 2 to 10 & Delaporte 3 & 5.

FNM 2206 PLP 1250

16. BAIN TOWN -P.D. 1 to 7, 10 & II Blue Hills 2 & 3 & Mt. Moriah 1 & 11.

FNM 1869 PLP 1815

17. FORT CHARLOTTE P.D. 1 to 6, 9 & 10 Bain Town 8, 9 & 12.

FNM 1977 PLP 1438

18. GRANTS TOWN P.D. 1 to II & Fort Charlotte 7 & 8.

FNM 1329 PLP 1880

19. CENTREVILLE, SHIRLEA & ST. MARGARET -

No Change recommended to Boundaries.

Although I do not agree with the division of the Kemp Road Community it is possible to join the Shirlea enclave to the Blair enclave leaving the Kemp Road Community in the middle. But it presents a Constituency with a "U" shape. This ought to be considered.

CENTREVILLE

FNM 1541 PLP 1872

SHIRLEA

FNM 1904 PLP 1395

ST. MARGARET

FNM 1825 PLP 1235

Add P.D. 10 and 1/2 of P.D. 2 west of Adderley Street from the Montagu Constituency

20. ST CECELIA P.D. 1 to 10 & Grants Town 12 & 13.

FNM 1706 PLP 1919

21. ENGLERSTON- P.D. 1 to 11 and Marathon 2 & 4.

FNM 1923 PLP 1965