UNCONSTITUTIONAL, DISCRIMINATORY AND INHUMANE, IF NOT APARTHEID

Elections 2010 ended with a resounding win for the Anguilla United Movement (AUM). There has been a clamour of the electorate signalling disappointment at the Anguilla United Front’s (AUF) dismal performance. Few have condemned Anguilla for a future five years with statements on how uninformed voters have led the country into a downward spiral. Some are thrilled, on the other hand, that the present AUM Administration’s foot is nowhere close the acceleration pedal or having a comfortable view of the road ahead, and is incompetent of driving. In fact, the majority are convinced that the chauffeur never had a qualifying driving license.

Others concluded that their existence depends on the pandering and keeping the uninformed voters at bay, an area other political parties on Anguilla have ignored and taken for granted – a method that works every time in the Caribbean. However, the less informed is not the majority and should serve as an aphrodisiac for changing our electoral system - Westminster’s First-past-the-post system – a system responsible for so many hung parliaments on Anguilla... political parties committing political suicide.

Urgently needed political reform will increase the legitimacy of our candidates, increase choice and is more democratic. We need to seriously consider - polling cards; postal, proxy and overseas voting; tactile device voting (for the disabled); and set-dates for elections.

With older conceptions of citizenship becoming increasingly irrelevant with the growing acceptance that individuals have multi-layered identities, It’s time for Anguillian-progressives to engage in serious constitutional politics on behalf of the right to all Anguillians to vote, by all means necessary, in an effort to redeem such an assault on our democracy. It’s clear that a major rethinking is necessary in order to address the growing political impasse between Anguilla’s vertical structure and the horizontal dynamics of diasporic transnations.

The Anguillian Diaspora has grown significantly worldwide, with a maintained level of constant and immediate contact through contemporary communication technologies which have developed that sense of being a global community. Transportation has also become much faster and relatively cheaper, enabling Anguillians to peregrinate frequently. However, government’s legislations and policies regarding citizenship in light of these developments have remained unconstitutional, discriminatory and inhumane, if not apartheid.

National values and social cohesion initiatives are seriously harmed and become baseless in such divide; and very little attention is given to the possible influence of the transnational and cosmopolitan outlooks on the dominant national discourse. In today’s global-village there is that need for policy-makers to seriously focus on developing ways to integrate that extra-national worldview ingredient for developing a stronger nation.

The concept of a homogenised national citizenship has become strained as individuals develop hybrid identities where a cosmopolitan outlook has been fostered by global mobility and Anguillians with diasporic connections through family, friends, business and other economic interest, and who participate in different national public spheres given their dual or multiple citizenships. Should this make them less Anguillian or deplete their constitutional or human rights?

It’s a shame that governments’ selfish political advantages have viewed participatory democracy specifically to jurisdiction, which maybe contravening United Nations accomplishments in the field of human rights: “Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives” (Article 21). This nation's tolerance for disenfranchisement in the twenty-first century is too uncomfortable moreover that its constitution explicitly guarantees citizens the right to vote and to be represented at all levels of government.

It has been said that a country gets the government it deserves; of which we are that image.

IT’S LIKE DEJAVU... OR AMNESIA

The intelligent Mr. Statchel Warner (former Road South Anguilla National Alliance’s candidate) once accurately written the Hon. Hubert Hughes' Biography a few years ago, describing it as empty (a well colourful decorated text-cover but completely empty in content).

The reality is dejavu as Anguilla is experiencing an empty political era liken the tunnel of light of near death experience. And when we turn our backs and walk away, the same old politics wins every time - the dreamwork visionless Hubert Hughes' confused nutshell mentality fear-mongering approach - decades of disrespectfully blaming the British and belittling our intelligence; incompetence; false starts; disunity; and trials and failures delivering failed leadership and government.

Or is it Amnesia?

The Hon. Edison Baird is unhappy and is threatening to resign; and blaming his friend, Mr. Victor F. Banks (former Hon. Minister of Finance), for not responding to his SOS which resulted this lame-duck administration. While the Parliamentary Secretary, the Hon. Haydn Hughes - responsible for misinformation, lies, propaganda, rumours and innuendoes - dictatorially runs every ministry and doggedly persuading the Hon. Jerome Roberts (Opposition MP) to cross the floor with the expectation of an AUM Government’s eventual demise.

There is no creativeness or initiative; no teamwork; no accountability or responsibility; no transparency or leadership; no respect; no objectivity or honesty... in essence - no good governance.

Then there is the unelected “Bloviation Committee” (JAPCY): Josie, Assie, Percie, Cliffie and yanchie – the disaster recipe!

And as the AUM Administration continues to explore the Waste Management Industry (national immeasurable garbage cleanup) as their legacy to jumpstart our economy - the Hon. Hubert Hughes starts his planned five-year taxpayers’ Retreats across the globe.

A disaster reincarnated!

Comments on a planned “hostile takeover” of ANGLEC

My recent articles/commentaries seem to have provoked some concern among supporters of the Government as to my motives. In fact one talk show, supportive of the Government, drew comments from one of its notorious callers that ”rather than writing articles and dividing the country Victor Banks should come in and work with the Government”. Another well-known pundit remarked: “Victor Banks was quiet for sixteen years all of a sudden he is in every publication of the Anguillian”.

I will not treat any of these viewpoints with the disdain they deserve --- but I believe that I should set the record straight. First of all I have decided to use this medium to share my views on issues with the public --- and you will note that I am not presumptuous to use the term “educate the public”. Secondly, I have decided that I will not hide under a pseudonym or pen name. I will write under my own name. Thirdly, I will not take cowardly shots on any blog --- I will take full responsibility for everything I say; and finally, I am totally committed to doing a regular commentary on the issues and hope that Anguillians recognize that it is necessary for a country and its citizens to be tolerant enough to accept opposing views. I have absolutely no intention of stopping.

This week I looked through my extensive catalogue of issues and decided that it is time to say something about the way this Government has dealt with Boards generally and the ANGLEC Board in particular. Why the ANGLEC Board? Because unlike the other Boards the proposed changes have not yet been consummated ---and my comments might perchance cause the Government to reconsider its plans.

Let me make the general point that any Government has the right to revisit any Board which it believes is not operating in the public interest or in keeping with its vision or mission for the organization. In addition, the Acts that govern the various Boards provide a timetable for the retiring of members and to outline any specific qualifications they should have. I make these comments without reference to the individuals selected to serve on the various Boards --- but I will point out certain principles that should be observed in the selection process.

It may be useful for me to create a list of categories of Boards associated with Government as follows:

• Boards of quasi-government agencies like the Social Security Board and the Anguilla Development Board.

• Boards of agencies owned and subsidized by Government like the Health Authority, the Tourist Board and the Anguilla Water Authority.

• Boards of Public Companies in which the Government of Anguilla has an interest like ANGLEC and to a lesser degree the National Bank of Anguilla.

• Miscellaneous Boards and Commissions established to deal with specific projects like the Port Authority Project Board; for specific purposes required by law like the Tenders Board and the Poor Law Board; for providing advisory support like the Education Advisory Board; for regulatory purposes like the Financial Services Commission; and so on --- the list is not exhaustive.

As I suggested earlier many of these Boards have clear guidelines as to the qualifications of individuals selected to serve on them for example business experience; legal expertise, professional training and so forth. But my concern and my purpose for this commentary is the approach adopted by the present government in treating with every category of Boards since ascending to office.

Never in our history has there been the kind of wholesale changes of Board membership by any government. This has led to the reasonable conclusion by many in the public that these actions are politically driven and that only avowed supporters of the Government, regardless of the appropriateness of their skill sets, are being placed on these Boards.

The other obvious fact is that the Government is not even waiting for the end of Board Member’s tenure to institute changes. In other words they have not given them time to fulfill their work plan nor have they taken the time to evaluate what the Boards have achieved and make a more informed decision.

Another questionable issue is the composition of the Boards. I am particularly concerned about Boards that have responsibility for funds that are for the benefit of the wider community like Social Security and the Anguilla Development Board. And again I leave readers to make up their own minds about the skill sets of the members of these Boards. What I have noticed, however, is that a number of Boards are now stocked with one or two extremely strong politicos whose dominance overwhelms the more moderate Board Members to the extent that his or their positions on issues become the position of the entire Board. The danger here is that a fund of over 250 million dollars is virtually controlled by one or two persons --- whose strong personalities drown out everyone else.

But my interest in choosing this topic was piqued by what is being proposed by the Government and its advisors for the public company ANGLEC. The identifying characteristic of a Public Company is exactly that --- it is owned by the public. And even though we live in a democracy --- provision is made to ensure that the majority does not trample on the rights of the minority. A public company should therefore as far as possible reflect the interests of all the shareholders.

For a Government which boasts of being for the people, all the people --- it is scandalous, the high-handed manner in which it has sought to carry out a “hostile takeover” of the ANGLEC utility. Every single Anguillian shareholder besides the Government and the Social Security Board are being effectively excluded and in truth disenfranchised from having any say in the running of ANGLEC.

The Honourable Minister of Utilities Mr. Evan Gumbs and the Chairman of the Social Security Board have actually joined together to take over the control of the electricity utility. It means that ordinary people and major shareholders like NBA and CCB have been relegated to rubber stamps in the governance of ANGLEC. They cannot even choose a single director that may represent any specific interests they may have.

Looking through the “rear view mirror” it is noteworthy that the past Government never selected a slate of candidates after ANGLEC became a public company. Candidates campaigned to shareholders to be Directors on the Board and once they passed through the process of pre-qualification the Government then decided which they would support. In this present case the slate of candidates, that I will list later, were unilaterally chosen by the Minister and the Chairman and their advisors to be on the Board on the basis of criteria which, not being clear and transparent, could lead one to believe that it can only be political. Furthermore, I have serious doubts whether any of the persons on the list solicited Government or Social Security to be on the ANGLEC Board.

The ANGLEC Board deals with a number of issues, auditing, investment decisions, infrastructure development, pricing, engineering issues etc. It has always been the consideration of the past Government that it supports candidates for selection as Directors on the basis of their suitability to contribute to the decision making process. There has never been a wholesale revamping of the Board. The past Government has always followed the legal provisions in the Act for retiring and selecting directors. The past Government has never sent a list of Directors to a Shareholders Meeting --- they simply had their representative vote for persons who would have put themselves up for election.

What is happening now is a marked departure from what is considered appropriate conduct for a public company. It means that the Government and Social Security can conceivably unilaterally decide on rates; dividends to be paid; investments to be considered; contracts to be awarded; Staffing and hiring issues; procurement issues etc. And because both the Ministry and the Social Security Board are now virtual political entities --- many of these decisions could be on the basis of political considerations.

I will list the slate of Directors for the new ANGLEC Board as proposed by the Honourable Minister of Utilities, Mr. Evan Gumbs and The Chairman of Social Security, Mr. Astaphan for your information. They are: Mr. James Richardson, Mr. Buxton Gumbs, Mrs Heartha Richardson, Mr. Bernard Smith, Mr. Victor Nickeo, Mr Vernon Richardson, Pastor Ambrose Gumbs and Ms. Merline Duncan.

I would venture to say that few of these candidates have had any experience on Boards but as in many cases I would expect that they have the platform for additional training. I say this in the context that in keeping with its mission to elevate the level of competence among members of Boards in the region, ECCB through the Eastern Caribbean Stock Exchange has initiated a number of comprehensive courses for Board Members particularly those of Financial Institutions and Public Companies. Every single member of the present ANGLEC Board of Directors has undergone this training.

ANGLEC is an asset valued at over 100 million dollars. Those of you from every political persuasion who put up your hard earned money to buy into the company as well as all customers must be concerned about the strength of the Board in managing your investment and in delivering your services. Let me repeat it again --- I am not making any judgment on the abilities of the proposed candidates. I am simply making the point that ideally the selection process should not be driven by political considerations alone.

My research has revealed that after the letter was sent to the ANGLEC Board by the Minister and the Chairman to call an emergency meeting to remove the present board members and replace them with their slate ---- the Board requested a meeting to discuss the issues. This letter was copied to all the Ministers. The high-handed response from the Minister and the Chairman is a threat, in writing, to take the Corporate Secretary to High Court if the meeting is not organized by June 23rd.

So I want to leave you all with a few thoughts to ponder on:

• ANGLEC is a public company in which a number of Anguillians and Anguillian entities have been encouraged to make considerable investments.

• The actions being pursued by the Minister and the Chairman are blatantly high-handed but may also be considered unethical and unfair

• The proposed action is not in keeping with the principles of good corporate governance especially important for public companies

• The proposed action is neither sensitive nor sensible for creating goodwill for an organization that has a monopoly on providing vital services to the entire nation.

• It is conceivable that this action could destroy the credibility of ANGLEC as it seeks to be a leading edge organization in a period when the focus is on important global issues like alternative energy and climate change.

Finally, it has been noted that the Honourable Minister of Utilities, Mr. Evan Gumbs during his campaign promised to reduce the price of electricity to consumers. While this is a good thing --- if the proposed actions are in any way a means of facilitating that promise, to the exclusion of considerations for the sustainability of the Utility for both customers and shareholders we are heading down a slippery and dangerous path.

Mr. Minister, Mr. Chairman, lets us make the slogan “giving power to the people” more than just political rhetoric. And let us not treat the minority shareholders in ANGLEC like simply “powerless spectators”.

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
May 18, 2010

Comments of the Brimigen Project Proposal

There seems to be a “mother lode” of issues that I can write about regarding this new Government --- as I grow steadily into my label as “The Journalist”. However, I think that it is imperative that I respond to a number of policy statements/proposals advanced by the Honourable Chief Minister and reinforced by his son the Honourable Parliamentary Secretary, Haydn Hughes.

During the election campaign the CM spoke about having a plan that he would release after the election --- a plan that, by his own expression “would turn this country around in a matter of weeks”. It was this plan that encouraged a number of eager Anguillians, frustrated by the economic downturn to support the AUM. Of course this was in addition to the ongoing refrain that the situation was caused by the past government and in particular the former Minister of Finance.

My curiosity was also peaked by the promise of a ready solution --- and I am now like so many other Anguillians left to speculate as to what that plan may be.

Of course we heard that Salamander would give the Government some 3.5 million US dollars to meet its economic challenges --- and eventually step in to be the saviour of the Flag Project. Over the weekend that vain wish went “out the window”, as correspondence reaching us have revealed that Salamander has no intentions to proceed any more with negotiations on FLAG. But that is a matter for future discussion.

But the main topic which I must address --- as I speculate about Hubert’s plan --- is his continued talk about a new airport in Brimigen and which his son Haydn in a report on his plans for Tourism affirmed was back on the table. I can also talk about the ludicrous plan for bringing water and electricity from St. Martin --- but again that is a matter for another presentation.

I must also express that the idea of building an airport in Brimigen was one espoused not only by the coalition Government of 1994 – 1999 --- but also by the Hon. James Ronald Webster government in 1981 – 1984. I was a Minister in both of those Governments. Both of those Governments discussed this project as an option to the development of the Wallblake Airport at a time when it was believed that a “green field” site would be more practical. I should also add that in 1988 Mr. Webster presented another option in his Anguillians for Good Government Manifesto --- the option of building the airport on Scrub Island.

The Honourable Chief Minister has long held the view that some “fairy godperson” would build an airport facility for Anguilla. His idea started in 1995 when he met with an Aruban Minister of Economic Development who showed an interest in providing finance, through an Aruban Development Bank, for an entity to be established in Anguilla which would build such a facility on a “BOOT” (i.e. Build Own Operate &Transfer) basis. The negotiations fell through when the Aruban Minister was unable to get the support of his ministerial colleagues.

Again in 1996 he approached a British consultant by the name of John de Upaugh --- who he was convinced could provide the finance for an airport project. Again the financing plan never got off the ground.

By 1997, a President of the Chamber of Commerce of Guadeloupe showed an interest in the project. Please bear in mind that the Chamber of Commerce in Guadeloupe is in fact a quasi- government department financed, jointly by contributions from registered businesses and the government, and capable of leveraging finance from government agencies and regional and international development banks.

It was always a matter of concern for my ministerial colleague, the Honourable Edison Baird and myself to figure out how these financing arrangements would work --- given the axiom that “you don’t get anything for nothing”. Eventually, in November 1998, the President of the Chamber presented us with a memorandum of agreement which outlined that a consortium of businesses from the Guadeloupe Chamber of Commerce would provide us access to funding provided that the Government of Anguilla would, among other things, grant them approval to develop 5,000 hotel rooms over a five year period on Anguilla.

It was at this point that Mr. Baird and I decided that this was not a viable opinion. My own reaction was driven by the following reasons:

• 5,000 hotel rooms in five years departed from the accepted and longstanding policy of “low volume high value” tourism.

• 5,000 hotel rooms meant a considerable demand for labour in the construction phase and using the formula of three workers per room up to 15,000 in the operational phase.

• The Guadeloupe Chamber would be owning/controlling a considerable part of Anguilla’s infrastructure and tourism plant.

• Government would need to acquire several hundred acres of land and conceivably relocate a number of homes.

• Government would have to reroute and develop a number of roads and utility systems.

• The British Government was not supportive of such an expansive project based on the capacity of the government to maintain that level of debt.

During its tenure of office beginning in 2000, the AUF Government was faced with the challenge of attracting investment into Anguilla after the recession of 2000 and the impact on the tourism industry in the wake of the 911 terrorist attacks. As a part of our strategic plan for economic recovery in 2002 --- we recognized that both public sector and private sector investment was necessary to bring about a turnaround in our economy. The critical public sector project identified for this purpose was the Wallblake Airport Expansion project. In fact all potential investors insisted that they would not be prepared to proceed unless they received some confirmation that this project would be delivered within an agreed time frame. On the Government side we needed to design a project that was manageable and deliverable from available resources. We recognized that the expensive options of Brimigen or Scrub Island were not viable so we put together a financing plan that met with FCO approval. It was a plan which was consistent with both the immediate and the longer term needs of our Tourism Sector and was fitted with our “tested and tried” “low volume high value” tourism product.

The Airport Expansion project was delivered on time and within budget and fulfilled the objectives of attracting major investment to Anguilla. All compliments must go to the constantly maligned WAEP project team, the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development. It was in fact the largest public sector project ever undertaken on Anguilla and the main pillar of the economic boom that we enjoyed during 2003 to 2008.

The present Chief Minister has been arguing that the Wallblake Airport is a failed project and that it has not provided the required access support for our tourism industry. He then proceeds to suggest that what we really need is an airport in Brimigen that can take international commercial flights. I have also heard one talk show host who supports this government talking about making Anguilla a hub.

As I listened, her guest on the show Mr. Sutcliffe Hodge appeared to be not supportive of her thesis --- to the extent that he quite correctly pointed out the tremendous cost of such a project. What seems clear is that a number of close advisors to the Chief Minister have not taken the time to research the travel trade and the airline industry or even further try to be conversant with the issues affecting access to our destination.

I am certain that the general public is aware that there is another phase to the Wallblake expansion project which would provide an additional 600 feet. This would create the capacity for any access arrangements which the industry would require now or in the distant future. It is also well known that there is already in place a master plan which includes the implementation of the facilities for the private jet service operator (commonly known as an FBO) as well as extended apron and parking facilities, and a new terminal facility. These plans are in keeping with the requirements of our tourism industry.

All of the foregoing was presented to illustrate that while in 1981 and 1994 the idea of a “green field” site may have had some merit, however marginal, we have come a long way since that time. Furthermore, it is improbable that the Government of Anguilla could make a successful business case for developing a new international airport as a hub in such close proximity to Juliana Airport. But there are some even more compelling reasons against it in the Chief Minister’s own arguments which makes the proposition illogical even incongruous as follows:

• The Chief Minister has been accusing the past Government of “racking up” an enormous debt burden now he proposes to spend more than five times the total national debt on a one project.

• The Chief Minister is saying that the present facility is unsustainable yet he is talking about building a larger facility that will require many more landings to make it feasible.

• The Chief Minister is talking about bringing water and electricity from St. Martin yet he is not prepared to use the well-developed access from the Juliana Airport.

• The Chief Minister talks about supporting Anguilla businesses yet he seems prepared to overlook the investment that young Anguillian entrepreneurs have put into the airline industry and its support services to meet our unique circumstances.

• The Chief Minister continues to speak about foreign control of the economy yet he is prepared to agree to bring in a French agency and a private consortium to control the air transport sector and own a huge percentage of the tourism plant.

• The Chief Minister talks about rapid development yet he is prepared to agree to building out more than three times the present room capacity in five years.

• The Chief Minister is constantly talking about the borrowing guidelines yet he seems to be negotiating a project without regard for compliance with the key principles associated with them.

I have used the terms incongruous and illogical to describe the arguments that are being put forward to support building a new airport in Brimigen. Since we already have a facility that can meet our air transport sector needs --- especially when the expansion phases are implemented --- it would seem more logical and practical that we consider the construction of a very essential Seaport facility being proposed for Corito.

I want to again take the opportunity to thank the residents and property owners of the George Hill, Statia Valley, Long Ground, Forest, and Rey Hill communities for the contribution they have made so as to provide for the implementation and operation of the Wallblake Airport to meet the air access needs of Anguilla. I am confident that your contribution will never be considered a vain sacrifice. And for other Anguillians and those who have an interest in our country I remain supremely confident that the Brimigen Airport Project will neither take-off or land. No pun intended!


Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
May 11, 2010

A DISENFRANCHISED ELECTORATE – A WASTED VOTE

The global economic crisis has hit Anguillians especially hard - many are still suffering from high unemployment, with our community hit nearly twice as hard as the rest of the Caribbean; and an empty visionless AUM Administration leading the suffering.

Unless this lame-duck Administration does something big to create new jobs — and soon — the situation would just keep getting worse. Each wasted day, and endless more in store, means more lost jobs, more homes and property taken away, and an embarrassment to the rest of the world as we remain stagnant; all of which will drag the economy down even further.

With a visionless AUM Administration and the will of the people swept aside, we’ve seen too well what happens. Corruption and incompetence paralyze our government, Anguilla’s ability to move forward is diminishing, and the fundamental fairness of our society diminishes to benefit a few.

Sound familiar?

Where are the accountability, transparency, restoring moral leadership and good-governance you were elected to lead? Change is a movement of people willing to step up and take personal responsibility – or was it misspoken for “rein”.

With all the straws harvested... where is the gold?

To be disenfranchised is a curse!