NASSAU| Somebody check the gas tank at headquarters. The torch is still on the letterhead, but the political fire
needs attention.
The Free National Movement cannot keep serving reheated defeat and asking supporters to compliment the chef. At some point, somebody must enter the kitchen, switch off the music and ask the uncomfortable question: how many times must the voters send back the plate before we change the recipe?
Across the past eight years, the FNM has moved from governing confidence to electoral defeat, leadership battles and another unsuccessful attempt to regain government. The party now faces a crisis of connection. Too much energy goes into deciding who belongs inside the tent while the voters are walking away from it.
And a tent full of officers is no substitute for an army.
Under Michael Pintard’s leadership, the FNM lost the West Grand Bahama and Bimini by-election, the Golden Isles by-election (with a candidate who been in the area for 20 years) and the May 2026 general election. Three different contests, with different circumstances, but one unavoidable question: is the present approach working?
Not once. Not twice. Three times!
That does not make every defeat one man’s personal creation. Political parties lose through weak organisation, poor judgment, internal divisions and failures to connect. But leadership cannot claim the captain’s chair and then become a passenger whenever the ship hits the reef.
The electorate has spoken. Headquarters cannot keep answering, “Sorry, we didn’t catch that.”
Rebranding has its limits. A new slogan cannot repair an old quarrel. Another launch cannot substitute for functioning constituency branches. And printing brighter red shirts will not make the public forget the last results.
The FNM needs an honest conversation about its bench. Even if that conversation ends in rifts and tearing. An organization must break down to rebuild.
When a campaign repeatedly loses ground, sensible commanders review the battle plan and reconsider the people drawing it. They also ask whether experienced hands, now standing outside the room, still have something valuable to offer.
Three names deserve that conversation: Zhivargo Laing, Desmond Bannister and Kenyatta Gibson.
Laing brings something political platforms often advertise more enthusiastically than they deliver: substance. His record includes parliamentary service, ministerial responsibilities in finance, economic development, education and youth, and public-policy work.
His continued presence on talk radio gives him a platform for explaining national issues beyond election season. That matters. Bahamians are trying to understand why their salary reaches Wednesday while their bills remain firmly committed to
Friday.
A politician who can explain an economic problem, defend a practical solution and survive questions about both has value. Laing offers the possibility of connecting policy with everyday concerns. His political contribution need not be confined to memories of his parliamentary career. There may still be a substantial chapter left to write.
Then there is Desmond Bannister. A former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Works, Bannister has experience at the senior levels of government. Whatever anyone thinks of the Minnis administration, that experience cannot sensibly be dismissed merely because the administration lost office. Political parties sometimes treat defeat like a hurricane: everything gets thrown outside, including furniture that was perfectly useful.
The FNM should examine what Bannister could contribute to organisation, mentoring and strategic planning. Rebuilding requires the patience to repair relationships and the discipline to turn decisions into action. His governing experience deserves a place in that assessment. There is a difference between knowing where to put the microphone and knowing what to do after the applause stops.
And then there is the wildcard: Kenyatta Gibson.
Gibson won the former Kennedy constituency in 2002 and 2007 under the PLP banner before joining the FNM. His electoral experience reaches across the political divide, a relevant consideration for a party that must persuade more than its most faithful members. His forceful political voice also deserves consideration. Bahamas Press previously highlighted his parliamentary speaking ability when discussing him as a possible Senate appointment. He can be loud and bombastic; with a tall presence captivating strong political attention.
Some politicians deliver a speech. Others make the room sit up and reconsider its afternoon. Gibson could bring that energy to a broader team, provided it is matched with clear ideas and a convincing account of what he offers today.
Laing’s policy depth, Bannister’s senior governing experience and Gibson’s political voice represent different strengths already present deep inside the shadows of the FNM. Each deserves scrutiny. Each would have to demonstrate present relevance. None
comes with a receipt guaranteeing victory, but hey, they all pose a strong start of hope. But surely a party searching for its footing can afford to examine the shoes already in its cupboard.
What should trouble FNMs most is the possibility that disappointment is becoming resignation. An angry supporter still cares enough to argue. A silent supporter may already have stopped expecting anything. Think about the people who carried this party through its hardest years. The branch members who gave their evenings. The volunteers who walked in the hot sun. The supporters who defended the FNM at work, at home and around the domino table, sometimes with more passion than the people holding office. What they all say now – when they see nothing change inside the halls of the FNM? Resignation becomes a pandemic, and boy sure and certain extinction becomes the political reality for the opposition party.
The loyalty of those political footmen (and women) deserves more than another request to be patient.
A political party begins to decline when its own people stop feeling needed. When every disagreement becomes disloyalty, every experienced voice becomes a threat and every defeat produces another explanation instead of meaningful change, even faithful supporters grow tired. And tired people eventually put down the flag.
That is why the FNM needs a revival that reaches its branches, its supporters and the wider public. It needs to make people feel that their work matters, their concerns are heard and their party still has something useful to offer the country.
WE AM NOT endorsing any of these three men for a run in the FNM’s upcoming convention. We are arguing that the party needs to bring people back into the room who have public appeal, top-tier political grit and the credibility to turn weary supporters into willing believers. Prime Minister Philip Davis KC brought the PLP from fire and ashes following that crushing defeat back in 2017 after being left with only four MP in Parliament. And look what has happened to the PLP since 2017.
People who can earn attention, withstand pressure and give the country a reason to listen.
Nobody can promise that donors will come rushing back with chequebooks open. After all more than half of the people writing cheques these days to politicians have their funds being transferred toward “progress”.
Confidence must be earned through unity, credible leadership and a plan with more detail than “next time will be different.” Nor should recalling experienced figures mean pushing younger talent into the corridor. The best generals develop successors. They do not confiscate every chair in the command room.
The FNM must decide whether it wants renewal badly enough to entertain uncomfortable possibilities.
Another meeting to discuss the previous meeting is unlikely to frighten the PLP. The torch can burn brightly again. But somebody must stop admiring the handle and attend to the flame. Cause in these days with gas prices going the way it is the fire will soon be extinguished for good if change is not seen in the FNM!
Bring the people back into the room before the country stops noticing who is missing. A torch is meant to light the way, not mark the spot where a movement died.
We report yinner decide!
