chancellor
04-24-07, - 01:26 AM
I challenge this topic as a viable issue.
This has been a target used by people opposed to the FNM and Hubert Ingraham in particular, The Prime Minster has used this as much as he has used the pension issues as a target. But yet has failed to reinstate it.....which leads me to question why it is even an issue?
The way I see the repeal of that act was a key strategy to kick start foreign investment in The Bahamas to the level that it has today.....No way in hell would any Bahamian Government with it's beuracratic proceedures would have been able to process and $20billion in proposed investments with that act, which required government approval of the purchase of land by any foreigner. Even if I, was privately selling my land to a foreigner, it would need their approval, and if they think such a person should not have a stake of land in The Bahamas, they would walk away....perhaps to another country to invest in....and I would not make my sale
Today anyone can swoop in and at least buy at least 5 acres of land and then go through investment applications with the necessary agencies...which means money is already invested into the country through real estate before a single shovel gets into the ground. This is perfect to at least small scale foreign investors, who want to invest their 5-10 million....which adds up as they continue to come in.
We argue that because of the repeal of the act, and surge in purchaces price has gone up....way up, esspecially in New Providence. The people of The Bahamas voted for such an encouragement in activity in 2002. We all want foreign investments and big businesses in our country(in our instance, large resort businesses which ultimately consumes land) , but we as Bahamians have yet to realize that this level of activity would have ultimately led to the conditions we have now, and today we refuse to believe that it would not happen this way.
We have to ask ourselves, if the act was still around, would this government still approve the sale of all of this development? Of course projects like Ginn Bahamar, and IGroup still needed the approval, but we are not aware of the thousands of other that tie their money into condo properties throughout the country...would our government still approve those? If so they still would be ultimately responsible for the surge in land prices.
The thing is...PM Christie....PM Ingraham......Real Estate agencies....Foreigners....Hoteliers....some Bahamians and etc knows that the repeal of the act is a major factor of some is this deluge of foreign investment. The truth is the repeal was the removal of a barrier to more free movement of investment capital. Without it PM Christie would have been boasting at least.... half of the 10 billion, which is still a big number, but it would have been otherwise controlled investments. None of them would say this...but yet the very same thing that I am supposed to deny the FNM a term on...is the very thing the PLP is quieting using to support their economic platform.
That is what I arrived at. :)
This has been a target used by people opposed to the FNM and Hubert Ingraham in particular, The Prime Minster has used this as much as he has used the pension issues as a target. But yet has failed to reinstate it.....which leads me to question why it is even an issue?
The way I see the repeal of that act was a key strategy to kick start foreign investment in The Bahamas to the level that it has today.....No way in hell would any Bahamian Government with it's beuracratic proceedures would have been able to process and $20billion in proposed investments with that act, which required government approval of the purchase of land by any foreigner. Even if I, was privately selling my land to a foreigner, it would need their approval, and if they think such a person should not have a stake of land in The Bahamas, they would walk away....perhaps to another country to invest in....and I would not make my sale
Today anyone can swoop in and at least buy at least 5 acres of land and then go through investment applications with the necessary agencies...which means money is already invested into the country through real estate before a single shovel gets into the ground. This is perfect to at least small scale foreign investors, who want to invest their 5-10 million....which adds up as they continue to come in.
We argue that because of the repeal of the act, and surge in purchaces price has gone up....way up, esspecially in New Providence. The people of The Bahamas voted for such an encouragement in activity in 2002. We all want foreign investments and big businesses in our country(in our instance, large resort businesses which ultimately consumes land) , but we as Bahamians have yet to realize that this level of activity would have ultimately led to the conditions we have now, and today we refuse to believe that it would not happen this way.
We have to ask ourselves, if the act was still around, would this government still approve the sale of all of this development? Of course projects like Ginn Bahamar, and IGroup still needed the approval, but we are not aware of the thousands of other that tie their money into condo properties throughout the country...would our government still approve those? If so they still would be ultimately responsible for the surge in land prices.
The thing is...PM Christie....PM Ingraham......Real Estate agencies....Foreigners....Hoteliers....some Bahamians and etc knows that the repeal of the act is a major factor of some is this deluge of foreign investment. The truth is the repeal was the removal of a barrier to more free movement of investment capital. Without it PM Christie would have been boasting at least.... half of the 10 billion, which is still a big number, but it would have been otherwise controlled investments. None of them would say this...but yet the very same thing that I am supposed to deny the FNM a term on...is the very thing the PLP is quieting using to support their economic platform.
That is what I arrived at. :)