“MISSING THE POINT” #2

In my last posting I tried to underscore, that in spite of all the forceful rhetoric of AUM in the campaign, and promises made, after almost one year in office nothing has changed on the island. They should have come in with a knockout punch and put AUF to shame, that has not happened. We are still faced with severe problems and becoming progressively worse. Our health care situation is of grave concern to everyone, likewise the economic situation, while we have government being embroiled in a protracted battle with the Governor since taking office, a side show of disregard and disrespect and elements within the government screaming, “anti-AUM.” Is that really so? Personally I am not anti anything; I am pro-government, pro-country whether that is AUF or AUM. People want to support their government when they are doing the right things, government must govern to ensure that a better country emerges and the people are better off. With public gestures like “this government is unable to accomplish anything” because there is a monster in the room. The shadow of AUF and Victor Banks, and, “The Governor” sucks up all of the air.

In my opinion, the current impasse is not handled with the highest degree of statesmanship or within the competence of our constitutional framework. The people are looking for leadership, and do not expect to be lead into “a culture of disrespect.” With loose language, insulting gestures and carrying on a civil war on the interior. When put in context, the question must be asked, where is the standard we uphold? This government wants to be controversial; “There is honor in compromise if your objective is met.” There must be public critique to indicate those areas of public displeasure. The Deputy Governor, is an Anguillian and occupies a high office, if found effective in the execution of his duties, that is something for us all to be proud of, I dear say, it appears that much of this conflict is clearly the enormous intellectual gap between the legislative body and the administering body of the country with no common ground insight. Only this AUM government would frame a comparison and assume that our national profile would be illuminated with the distinguished and honorable person of Mr. Evan Gumbs as Honorable Chief Minister and head of State for any given period. The Governor has to answer to no one on Anguilla and only has an obligation of consultation with the Chief Minister. Contrary to perception, the Governor is not obliged to take advice given.

Before I continue to touch on other issues of concern I must make note of a severe chastisement I received from my critics, rated 5%, but appropriately so. Ironically I chose to write my opinions rather than talk, simply because, talk is cheap, and more so, on our airwaves. In emphasizing how the status-quo remains the same since this government took office, spelling the word, like I would speak it, (status-core) resulted in a side show by my critics. The article was posted on axa reality by consent. Thanks to my fan base for coming to my defense and separating my logic from my intellect, they actually gave me a 95% grade (impressive) and forcefully reiterated my points. The diehard elements of opposing minds are quick to trash, and gutter-talk anyone who tries to put in context our present dilemma. Writing is my hobby; and had attracted the attention of Sir Emile Gumbs way back in 1992 when he singled out one of my articles for recognition on the national platform. I am a very simple man, I do not have a degree in anything, I love dialogue on the issues of the country. I actually am a student in “Free Lance Writing and Journalism. A little of the theory, ‘The Writing Habit study unit’; “write your thoughts as much as possible, which is your thesis.” Personal experience, opinion, or humor writers want to convince you to a particular view held. Editorials and reviews try to create a reasonable-sounding argument for the reader. Informational or expository writing focuses on explaining facts and ideas. As an opinion writer, there is wiggle room from perfection, but if you are with an editorial staff, not so. As a writer you are indelibly stuck with the important task of editing, once, twice, and then your manuscript must be polished as a craft before being edited for publishing. Same in journalism, the 5 W’s, are the essential tasks in getting the story right, your story must answer the, who, when, why, where and what. I referred to the way our radio stations handle information as “puppet radio” because information gathered is not to satisfy personal curiosity, but to inform and educate. I won’t promise my critics that there won’t be any more written or grammatical errors and I welcome your perusal. My fan base clearly pointed out who they think my critics are, thanks for their keen observation. I should indicate that my postings are not geared to the intellectual class as they are, but to average minds like myself. You can consider my postings a work in progress.

I would like to summarize this article with some preferred commentary. It is very honorable to be elected to serve in the highest official capacity of the land, and for that matter, if one is selected because of the horror at the polls, and fear of being unelectable; this also comes with equal trust and honor. The embrace of these positions in any level of government comes with parallel responsibility. Attitude is a side show, what matters are, focus and execution. People expect their government to keenly highlight the state of affairs of the country and propose solutions. In the Friday edition of the Daily Herald I was very impressed with the article “HUGHES SIGHTS CONCERNS PUT FORWARD IN LONDON” even though it carried some of the usual rhetoric, for the most part the positions of The Chief Minister appeared well composed and framed to conveying a serious message about the business of the country, I’m sure a lot is contributed to the editorial staff of The Daily Herald because, I heard nothing of the speech in public debate. My contention for some time has been that this Government is not articulating the business of the country well enough whether that is in executive council, The House of Assembly or in public forum. Reading the article I felt that for the first time an image of competence has emerged from the laid back, throw back and careless language attitude. This article transmitted a serious mood about serious business, conveyed to the MOT and FCO. The Chief Minister sounded off like a head of state, his message was composed as one, and in the picture attached he looked like one.

By: ejharrisxm

“THE GRASS ALWAYS SEEMS GREENER ON THE OTHER SIDE!”

A few weeks ago the Honourable Chief Minister, Hubert B. Hughes in his continuing saga with the Governor and the British Government mentioned that he would be studying the new constitutional status that St. Maarten entered into on October 10, 2010. He was referring of course to the fact that the Kingdom of the Netherlands underwent a process of constitutional reform that basically dissolved the Netherlands Antilles (which comprised the Dutch Caribbean territories) to bring into being a new constitutional structure that would grant Curacao and St. Maarten the status of countries within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. To put it in clearer perspective, those of you who are acquainted with the Aruba experience would understand that Curacao and St. Maarten are now like Aruba was, since 1986, when it opted for an arrangement outside of the Netherlands Antilles that was dubbed “status aparte”. Of course, when Aruba was first granted “status aparte” it was deemed to be a first step towards independence --- that step is now almost a quarter of a century old.

There is a very old saying that: “the grass always seems greener on the other side”. I have heard the Chief Minister in many of his debates make reference to other islands and territories in the Caribbean while making comparisons on a range of different issues. In many cases, and upon closer examination, the discerning listener may discover that things may not always be as they first appear and that perhaps we in Anguilla may be better off than those with whom we so readily compare ourselves --- as we try to make political points. However, having said that, I am in no way suggesting that all is well with Anguilla --- but merely warning that we need to vet our comments very carefully before we jump to conclusions. I say this because I believe that when the Chief Minister made reference to the new constitutional structure for St. Maarten, his demeanour suggested that he felt that it was something to which we in Anguilla should strive to aspire. In particular, he seemed to be excited by the fact that the head of the government is called “the Prime Minister” which could suggest that the new status mirrors that of an independent nation.

A friend and colleague from St. Maarten allowed me to have sight of a document produced jointly by the Ministry of the Interior & Kingdom Relations and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands that describes, in précis form, its new constitutional structure. It is my understanding that the document was also reproduced in the Herald newspaper but being off-island, I could not confirm this at the time of writing. But if you can get hold of that document it would provide you with useful reference for my comments.

In addressing the issue of the new constitutional structure I will speak about St. Maarten, our closest neighbour, which is one of the four “equal countries” in the Kingdom. In this context, whatever I have to say about St. Maarten also applies to the other two Caribbean countries Aruba and Curacao. They have the same status in the new Kingdom arrangement. I have also decided to do so because the close relationship we have with St. Maarten historically, socially, economically and geographically will allow for more effective comparison. The islands of Bonaire, St. Eustatius and Saba having decided to remain closely aligned with the Netherlands have in a sense been integrated as the “Caribbean part of the Netherlands” rather than being separate countries like Aruba, Curacao and St. Maarten.

In this new structure St. Maarten has its own government and parliament. As you will recall even though St. Maarten had its own island council the power to make laws resided with the central government and parliament located in Curacao. St Maarten will now be responsible for making laws relating to its own affairs. Obviously, these laws can neither be adapted nor enacted in the short term so in the interim the Antillean legislation on the books will apply where possible. The Government of the Kingdom (Netherlands) will be represented by a Governor and the island council will be abolished. In this regard, one can fairly conclude that St. Maarten has arrived at the point where Anguilla was in 1976 when we introduced the Westminster model of government, however, the difference appears to be that, in practice at least, the position of Governor will be held by a local St. Maartener. It may be instructive to observe the St. Maarten process for selecting its Governors to see whether this can inform an objective discussion with our administering power on this subject.

In this new structure, the Kingdom of the Netherlands will still hold responsibility for foreign affairs and defense. These matters will be dealt with in the Council of Ministers for the Kingdom in The Hague, the Parliament of the Netherlands. St. Maarten is represented in that Council by a “Minister Plenipotentiary” which means a person appointed by the St. Maarten Government to act on its behalf. While there is a Minister of Foreign Affairs who deals with the Kingdom of the Netherlands as a whole there can be specific treaties and conventions that may not apply to the entire Kingdom but rather to specific countries. In this regard, St. Maarten has its own Foreign Relations Department where it can deal with issues of regional significance but any agreements will still have to be concluded by the Kingdom. It also means that embassies, consulates and permanent missions/representations of the Kingdom, wherever they are located, will deal with issues affecting St. Maarten as well.

The management of foreign affairs in this new St. Maarten arrangement is much more formal and institutionalized than what obtains in the case of Anguilla with the United Kingdom. In our case the British Government is responsible for foreign affairs but there is no Anguillian representation in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in London neither is there a department of foreign relations in Anguilla. The British Government through the Governors Office deals with these matters and may when it deems appropriate delegate some regional issues to the Chief Minister’s Office. While this arrangement has seldom presented any challenges for Anguilla a number of territories have experienced, on occasion, reluctance on the part of the British Government to grant them the “entrustments” (basically meaning authority) to sign on to regional treaties and agreements. As Anguilla begins to develop closer ties in the region and “the neighbourhood” it may be worthwhile beginning a dialogue with the UK Government for formalizing the process of dealing with external affairs particularly as it relates to these issues.

St Maarten will work together with the Netherlands “in the interests of protecting the independence of the judiciary, tackling corruption and cross-border crime, and maintaining public order”. This arrangement includes a joint Court of Justice for the administration of justice in St. Maarten as well as the other Caribbean parts of the Kingdom both the countries and the public bodies, namely, Bonaire, Statia and Saba. And while there will be separate police forces, cooperation in the form of the joint criminal investigation team which existed before the dissolution of the Antilles will continue. The Netherlands will also continue to be involved in financial oversight.

In terms of these arrangements, though they do not exactly match those in Anguilla, the effect is the same. We are part of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court Judiciary and we have formal cooperation agreements with the regional police associations as well as the UK Overseas Territories Police Advisory Division. Like in the case of St. Maarten, the UK is involved in financial oversight and I imagine as in our case the Netherlands is very much involved in ensuring that St. Maarten is compliant with international standards for financial regulation and best practices.

Speaking specifically, to financial oversight, a Financial Supervisory Authority has been established in St. Maarten to supervise public finances under the ultimate authority of the Council of Ministers for the Kingdom. The Authority has as its underlying supervisory principles a balanced budget, prudent financial management and a cap on contracting debt. Again this is not dissimilar to the situation in Anguilla where the Governor is responsible for financial regulation and supervision under the auspices of the Secretary of State. And when borrowing, in addition to being passed in the House of Assembly, requires the approval of the Secretary of State. In the case of Anguilla we do have a Financial Services Commission that deals with regulation of the Financial Sector but it does not have a function in the oversight of Government finances. This is obviously an area where recent actions by the present Government and the Social Security Board could have been vetted and the embarrassment that now exists could have been averted.

I made mention of the St. Maarten judiciary arrangements and the similarity to the Anguilla situation in terms of its functioning but I must speak specifically about Section 8 of the St. Maarten Constitution that deals with the Constitutional Court. The significance of this is not only that provision was made for its establishment under Article 127 of the Constitution --- but also the fact that it was actually inaugurated last Monday, November 15, 2010, just over a month after the new status came into force. Mr. Richard Gibson a highly respected lawyer in St. Maarten, who was very much involved in the constitutional consultations, in his remarks at the opening of the Constitutional Court said: “Most countries in the world have a Constitutional Court, but such a Court does not exist in any country in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The establishment of this Court came about because of the perseverance, insistence, maturity and conviction of St. Maarten that its citizens and its democracy will be best served by creating a separate Constitutional Court, with the expertise and flexibility to effectively and efficiently deal with constitutional issues to guard against the erosion of the rights and freedoms of citizens of St. Maarten.”

A very important aspect of the operations of the Constitutional Court is the Ombudsman, an office established under Article 78 of the St. Maarten Constitution and already filled. As a matter of fact the holder of that position Dr. Nilda Arduin also spoke at the inauguration of the Court last Monday and in her own words described her role as follows: “The Ombudsman has the authority by law to investigate the improper conduct of government bodies, including ministers and all civil servants. Parties summoned by the Ombudsman are compelled by law to provide information, follow recommendations offered by the Ombudsman to resolve conflicts, adapt procedures, and take measures. It is however the Parliament that can query and summon the Ministers to give account to Parliament regarding their Ministerial responsibility for the assigned portfolios.”

My reason for making specific mention of the Constitutional Court and the Ombudsman is the fact they are both aspects of the St. Maarten Constitution that addresses the concerns expressed by so many Anguillians regarding any discussion about independence. Mr. Richard Gibson who I quoted earlier tells the story of a lady in Saba who was asked by a politician what she thought of independence. The politician in a effort to prompt a response said to her: “With Independence we will have our own parliament; we can make our own decisions; we can do whatever we want!” The lady pondered deeply before she responded then said: “Well, tell me --- if we become independent and government and parliament can make any decisions they want --- who will be watching our politicians?”

That story makes me reflect on the fact that whenever the present Government is prohibited by protocol, legislation or the constitutional arrangements with the United Kingdom from taking a political action they begin to cry out for independence. The role of the Ombudsman and the Constitutional Court in the St. Maarten Constitution are two of the institutions that carry out the function of guarding and protecting freedoms and rights to which our citizens are entitled. Our politicians should become aware that if they have ambitions about moving into independence they must begin by recognizing their responsibility to respect the various checks, balances and safeguards which must of necessity be enshrined in the constitutions of all modern democracies.

In preparing to write this column I questioned my colleague and friend from St Maarten as to what he thought about the new Constitutional arrangements as opposed to the Anguilla situation. I also said to him that we were going through a constitutional reform process for almost ten years and the consensus has been that we should press the British for full internal self- government --- and that there are many aspects of the St. Maarten model that I thought would be extremely useful in our discussions with the British Government. He replied very candidly, that there were a few points that we should ponder on which were missing in their arrangements. We should not allow our non-reciprocal arrangements with the UK and the European Union (EU) to be diluted in any new structure; we should always maintain the requirement for alien landholding licences by all non-Anguillians to purchase property; and we should continue to disallow rights of establishment for non-Anguillian companies, that is, it should not be automatic for UK and EU companies to do business in Anguilla. My colleague felt that in this sense the Anguilla arrangements could be considered more favourable! Which simply reinforces the point that “the grass always seems greener on the other side!”

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
November 23, 2010

ANGUILLA GOVERNMENT WAS TOLD-OFF BY BRITAIN...

A fact summary:

“You are irresponsible people – immature - paying very little in return for living in a civilized world, with roads, airport, government buildings, fire and police protection, public libraries, good schools, hospital and clinics and much more. Or are you still living in the jungle, where it's every man, woman and child for themselves – chaos, anarchy, violence and lawlessness?

The problem is that your government (Anguilla United Movement) while envisioning its permanence in opposition, has successfully propagandized against paying taxes for decades, and has duped your supporters that they don't get anything for their taxes; while the cowardly Anguilla United Front opposition sat in government with its corporate lackeys in silence, and went along with your charade.

The reality is that all you crooks know how crucial to society, to civilization, to a functioning government, community and country a strong system of revenue is... but were too greedy, irresponsible and arrogant to want to pay your fair share; apparently anticipating scavenging our resources, community, time and abilities.

And as reality lurks, good governance has been muffled as present and future governments must recapture and reframe this imminent issue, with the phobia of losing an election when it comes to increasing revenue to help your community and your country.

We are demanding to government, politicians, influence-peddlers and lackeys alike... it's time to grow up and get serious with reality on Anguilla. You must pay your fair share for the things that you as a society enjoy and that are crucial to your success as a nation and as a People.”

“MISSING THE POINT”

It could be easily concluded that the behavior of this government is erratic to say the very least, and so it is not easy to anticipate where we are headed as a country in the immediate future. From statistical data we understand that the country continues on a steep and steady decline. The electorate must take careful note that nothing has changed since this government took office in spite of the extreme rhetoric from the AUM political campaign. Time is actually running out for this government to produce, considering the energy placed on controversial issued that does in no way contribute to the status-quo. We are all, not really surprised, but taken aback to see the chaos the country is faced with today.

It is very clear that the AUM team is grossly unprepared to govern, they, without doubt have misconstrued the enormous task of governing the country. It has been a decade since our Chief Minister has functioned in an executive capacity and has failed to recognize the necessary adjustments he needs to make to effectively function. Anguilla must be proud of a well qualified and equipped civil service, so it is questionable why government keeps on trying to depreciate their service to the country. The Honorable Chief Minister “misses the point” to assume that the mindset of the Anguilla people are still in the era of the sixties, he fails to understand that with a more educated electorate and more so, civil service provides the island with more independent minds and a better capacity to function more independently. The Chief Minister should be reminded that his vindictive approach to rule is not an acceptable practice today; this brings into question his behavior with the honorable Edison Baird, being the most well prepared minister that can contribute to a better government. In the absence of a well oiled governing machine on the island, it is without doubt hurting all of us and is in fact beginning to make the island look ridiculous on the regional stage.

This government has done nothing by means of strategic planning or innovative thinking to advance our footprint into the future. The hostility between the extreme elements of power, the Governor and Chief Minister is actually a work in progress for the AUM government; the extra ordinary visibility of the Governor in the governing process fills the void of a progressive Government failing to set a course for the island. From the outset this government failed to address the people on the state of affairs instead, the Chief Minister came in with an onslaught of threats and allegations even against the British whom he blamed foremost for the economic situation of the island, vowing to collect reparation. So in my judgment, the Governor is very courageous, and well within his jurisdiction to act. It would have done this government well if they had invited the Caricom delegation here under different circumstances, perhaps to do an urgent assessment of the state of affairs of the country and assist, because when a government is elected, they go to work, and the first order of business is to have a clear analysis of where the country is, where is it we want to go, and how are we getting there. This must be conveyed in the best possible way to the people. To invite them here to lecture the Governor on his constitutional rights, and a matter that could be settled with adequate prudence and protocol appears to be a characterization of the problem, which is exactly the case. These are the remarks of the Chief Minister to one of is puppet radio stations, “The Governor continues to work with the opposition to try to prevent the normal flow of economic development for Anguilla. Because as long as he occupies my time with gossip and conspiracies, I am not able to concentrate on the real business and that is to get the economy back on stream which they have destroyed. “Pure and utter nonsense.” Such talk is clear enough that there is nothing on the desk of the Chief Minister. If the Caricom delegation took the opportunity to visited the internet site “AXAreality” they would be shocked to realize the level of disrespect our Chief Minister has racked up in short, while The Governor is very well regarded for the quality of his work.

There is an obvious vacuum in the function of government and it is astonishing that this has not been recognized from the inside, but is rightfully recognized by the Governor this is the only reason for his pro-active conduct. In a conversation with a top class civil servant days ago he said “it’s our duty to run the island right irrespective to the political climate.” Our Chief Minister must be more diplomatic with his language, and must measure his speech with more sensitivity and government must function with a better degree of diplomacy that would transfer into a better administration. The energy used up on the ongoing controversy should be used to work together in the interest of the people, because certainly this Governor will leave the island at some point and sure enough another will come, as long as Mr. Hughes remains in this position we will continue to have this issue, because this is actually a continuation where he left off in 1999. Mr. Hughes and his government are “missing the point” one again, the lack of statesmanship and innovative leadership together with the adherence to protocol will continue to reduce the governing process to chaos demonstrated by a the lack of a clear vision for the country, The Governor has emerged as the country’s de-factor leader by the abyss created in the terrible performance by this government.


By: ejharrisxm

“And All That Jazz!!”

Let me take this opportunity to congratulate the Honorable Leroy Rogers for his appointment as Second Nominated Member in the Anguilla House of Assembly. I am sure that you will agree with me that he stands out among the excellent choices that could have been made by the Governor through the consultative process. His eleven years as Speaker of the House of Assembly should serve him well in a role that traditionally includes being appointed as Deputy Speaker. And his reputation for standing unswervingly on principle should afford him the neutrality that becomes that position.

I must also congratulate the Chief Minister and the Leader of the Opposition for reaching consensus on a very short list of choices and thereby enabling the Governor to arrive at a decision devoid of controversy. And I must also give the Governor credit for not using his power of appointment hastily as well as for his readiness to go beyond the strict constitutional interpretation of “consultation” to arrive at a true consensus of both Leaders of the House. All in all an excellent example of democracy, good governance and compromise at work.

Since I am in a congratulatory mode let me go on to commend Ujamaa Productions Ltd. for ensuring that the Tranquility Jazz Festival 2010 was a roaring success. Ujamaa Productions is an Anguillian company among its principals are Mr. John Benjamin; Mr. Fitzroy “Briggie” Tomlinson, and; Mr. James Connor. This is the eighth year for the Festival and it has become a very important part of Anguilla’s tourism product. It originated as an idea to create a Jazz Festival event that matches Anguilla’s unique clientele but also has appeal for pure Jazz aficionados. It is another thematic event on the calendar that targets a particular market but also acts as a shoulder for the start of the tourist season in November. Increasingly a number of visitors have been planning their vacations around this festival and the word has been spreading.

The slogan “straight up no chaser” indicates that unlike other jazz festivals in the region the Tranquility Jazz Festival Stage will not be shared by other “non-Jazz” artistes. However, all kinds of the Jazz art form are encouraged providing an opportunity for audiences with differing tastes to appreciate the fusion of jazz with their favourite choices in music. Jazz fuses readily with Reggae; Calypso; Soca; Gospel; Rock ‘n Roll; Latin Music; African Music; Classical; Rhythm and Blues; Country; the list goes on. In this context, I have heard many persons ask: Why do we need a Jazz festival? It is not our culture! Even if that statement was totally accurate --- neither is pizza our culture, yet we do enjoy it!

There are many theories about the origins of “jazz” as a music art form, which though different, have one common thread that is that it evolved from African American communities in the Southern United States from a blending of African and European music traditions. It represents the efforts of mainly black musicians in sparse environments in states like Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Tennessee and Louisiana particularly the city of New Orleans to incorporate African tribal drum styles, gospel, blues, and work chants into their interpretation of the music of the period. Mr. Merwyn Cooke in his book: “Jazz” gives an description of this evolution: “In the early 19th century an increasing number of black musicians learned to play European instruments, particularly the violin, which they used to parody European dance music in their own cakewalk dances. In turn, European-American minstrel show performers in blackface popularized such music internationally, combining syncopation with European harmonic accompaniment. Louis Moreau Gottschalk adapted African-American cakewalk music, Southern American and other slave melodies as piano salon music. Another influence came from black slaves who had learned the harmonic style of hymns and incorporated it into their own music as spirituals.”

I am sure that you have noted the similarities of the origins of “jazz” with the music within our tradition. In fact, many of the “homemade” instruments used in string bands around Anguilla and the Caribbean are similar to those used in the very early evolution of jazz and blues. And the focus on interpretation, improvisation and spontaneous adaptation of songs and melodies rather than strictly playing to the written composition is the distinguishing characteristic of this art form which gives rise to the many distinctive styles of jazz and jazz artistes the world over. In fact, many of the early jazz musicians did not read music but “played by air” as we say in Anguilla. As a consequence, even now in more formal settings the skilled performer does not play the same composition exactly the same way twice. Typically, this is reminiscent of the kind of “jam sessions” which are so familiar and are applauded in our Caribbean and Anguillian culture.

If you are still confused as to what jazz is Louis “Satchmo” Armstrong the great musician whose name is synonymous with the art form gives a profound response to the question of a proper definition when he says: “If you gotta ask, you’ll never know!” In making that statement he perhaps captured the essence of jazz as having to do with the entire experience and expression of life that is at the very heart of the music. And in 1987, the US House of Representatives and Senate passed a bill proposed by Democratic Representative John Conyers Jr., to define jazz as a unique form of American music stating among other things, “…that jazz is hereby designated as a rare and valuable national treasure to which we should devote our attention, support and resources to make certain it is preserved, understood and promulgated.” The point I am making is that even though “jazz” defies definition --- it is real and is an important music genre which is not only enjoyed internationally but is institutionalized within schools, universities and the entertainment industry. In the tourism industry in particular it is the preferred music for piano bars and lounges in every major resort all over the world.

Eight years of growing the Anguilla Tranquility Jazz Festival has not been only about entertainment and product development --- it has also about education, exposure and job and business opportunities. From the very outset it was a program rather than a project. Here are some of those aspects of the Festival as follows:

• There was the Summer Jazz Camp Program where up to eighty school age students per year had the opportunity to study and learn the art form in a leisurely environment from teachers and students from established University programs in the United States.

• Students in the music programs were given free passes to attend the concerts to be exposed to various international jazz artistes as well as in a social setting to speak with them about their careers.

• Students were given the opportunity to show case their talents on stage either individually or as a part of small groups as opening acts for the main groups and artistes.

• “Jazz on the Parkway” afforded the opportunity for a larger selection of young Anguillian musicians to showcase their talents in community settings free to the public. This not only provided exposure for the young musicians but also an experience for persons not inclined to attend the evening concerts.

• Local musicians had the opportunity to present themselves at concerts along with the regional and international artistes.

These efforts had positive results for Anguillian talent. One of the early vocalists, Jaine Rogers gained valuable exposure that provided her with an opportunity to perform at a top concert in the United States and through Anguilla Music Production & Publishing (AMPP) another outgrowth of the Jazz program released her own professional recording (CD); the music program in the Albena Lake-Hodge Comprehensive School was the beneficiary of a Grand Piano as a result of initiatives by the Festival; a number of young people developed a keen interest in jazz and formed musical groups; Anguillian musicians adapted to provide jazz entertainment for the hotel and restaurant sector, and; a number of young entrepreneurs pursued business opportunities as a result of the development of the jazz experience.

I praise Ujamaa Productions for their courage and creativity. They held firm to the original vision even though the present Government decided that they would abandon seven years of effort ostensibly because as the Parliamentary Secretary spins it “The government took the decision that it would be best for a private institution to move forward with the jazz as opposed to the Government”. I also hold the Government fast to the statement made by the Parliamentary Secretary that “He thought that the Jazz Festival was very important to tourism and hoped that the Government would be in a very position next year to provide financial assistance towards its sponsorship”.

Ujamaa Productions did more than just stage a Jazz Festival they also included a Golf Tournament and Wine Tasting as additional features to the event that extended the appeal to more visitors and more business activity. But the fact that the Government did not contribute forced them to be more innovative and determined to make it work. Without the benefit of the facts I am certain that despite their efforts to be “lean and mean” with their costs they must still have some financing challenges --- and perhaps the quality of the events which they managed to pull off would encourage new and more sponsors (including Government) next year. And I must share their appreciation to those sponsors this year, which had confidence in the Festival and Ujamaa Productions. The attendance was reasonably good despite the lack of a promotion budget, obviously because of the excellent network that has been built up over the years.

It was a pleasure to hear the young musicians associated with the Albena Lake Hodge Comprehensive School music program, Pure Gentlemen, who performed creditably both on the main stage and on the side stage during the breaks and social mixes. They did us all proud! Also on the Caribbean Night Concert on Friday, the local group British Dependency that has been making its mark at a number of local venues and already have a great record album/CD, “brought the house down”. I believe that all of this augurs well for expanding the musical interests and choices of our young people. The nature of jazz as an art form lends itself to positive behaviour and requires a great deal of discipline. This was most obvious in the performances of the International and Caribbean artistes, Carla Cook, the Ronald Tulles Quartet, the Fred York Quintet and the Alex Bugnon Quintet that were all both professional and exceptional.

But having said all of that I must return to the subject of Government support for this important event on our Tourism calendar. It was disappointing that one did not notice any of the Government political directorate at any of these events. This belies the statements made by the Parliamentary Secretary about Government support. I believe that the fact that the Festival is in private sector hands by default can be a blessing in disguise. But I do not accept that it was a part of a deliberate Government strategy to do so --- because they never provided any incentive or “weaning” support to Ujamaa Productions. If Ujamaa Productions did not take the initiative on its own --- there would not have been a Tranquility Jazz Festival and it would not have mattered to Government. I believe that it was a deliberate attempt to destroy the Festival for the usual political reasons. This is unfortunate!

In the circumstances, while I understand there is some value in Government’s support for the “The Bachelor” TV program --- I do not accept that it necessarily had to be to the exclusion of some symbolic support for the Jazz Festival. There has been an incredible absence of transparency as to what transpired with those arrangements. And while I accept that there may be some proprietary issues that require cautious approaches --- it would have been sensible to give an appearance of appreciation for the efforts of the Ujamaa Productions with even a “widow’s mite”. It was really disingenuous of the Parliamentary Secretary, who is responsible for Tourism, to talk about wishing Mr. John Benjamin and the Ujamaa Productions team every success and all that jazz!

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
November 16, 2010

“MY EPIPHANY”

I must thank all those persons who, on Monday November 8, 2010, took the time in so many ways and via all sorts of media to extend birthday greetings to me. It was not expected; it was not necessary; it was not sought after but it was extremely gratifying to know that there were still quite a number of people who thought enough of me to want make that day seem special. I was especially pleased to receive a call that evening from the Hon. Evan Gumbs, my elected representative, also expressing his best wishes --- it was indeed very courteous and gracious of him. The truth is that I cannot recall any birthday that I received this level of attention. One of my friends suggested, humorously, that most of the calls were simply to find out my age so that they could play it in the Spanish Lottery. To which I replied that first of all the lottery has been closed down and secondly most of my friends already know that were it not for bad luck in such games of chance I would have absolutely no luck at all.

It was a refreshing change to hear kind words pouring out from radio stations that normally act as “bully pulpits” for my detractors. And even though I knew that it would be only for a couple of hours --- it reinforced my belief that perhaps we ought not to take these things personal. Of course that is easy for someone to say whose name is not constantly the topic of negative conversation --- when one is continually being maligned by some uninformed “talking heads” who relish in the opportunity to expound on matters that they know precious little about. And some “so-called” journalists whose knowledge of what constitutes a reliable source, is tempered by partisan affiliations and delusions of grandeur.

In my article last week I dealt with the overwhelming discussion by the Chief Minister on transshipment I will return to that later in this piece but I must mention an important item he breezed over in that press statement because it has value for our economic development. The Chief Minister said that while he was in Barbados he visited the Canadian High Commission to sign another “TIEA”. A “TIEA” is a Tax Information Exchange Agreement which, of course, means exactly what it says that is an agreement to exchange information on tax matters. It would be realized that Anguilla being a “no tax” jurisdiction as far as direct taxes on income is concerned would have less to benefit from such agreements. And the fact that the amount of our nationals or Anguillian companies operating in other jurisdictions is much less than the other way around would certainly require us to provide more information than we receive. To arrive at some parity in these agreements it is therefore necessary for a developed country to provide some concessions or incentives to small places like Anguilla all of which would form a part of these agreements. During my tenure as Minister of Finance I signed the first eleven of these with a number of European Countries and Scandinavian Countries as well as New Zealand, Faroes Islands and Greenland. The Chief Minister would have subsequently signed with Germany and Australia just over a month after coming into office and with Canada just two weeks ago.

The importance of the TIEA’s is the fact that as we increase the number of signed agreements we improve our rating as a cooperative jurisdiction and as such avoid the negative “black, grey and white listing” labels that affect our ability to be a serious player in Financial Services. Like it or not Financial Services is the other important plank of our development strategy and has the capacity, if we can achieve a viable niche market, to equal Tourism in its contribution to our economy. I therefore congratulate the Chief Minister and the Government for pursuing this course and rather than being xenophobic, they are trying to understand the requirements for exploiting the opportunities that this may create. My satisfaction is based on the fact that while in Opposition the Chief Minister was very critical about regulation and oversight measures being implemented through legislation in the House of Assembly and of the fact that the Governor was ultimately responsible for the regulation of the financial sector.

There is of course much to be concerned about with the trends in promotion of international cooperation in tax matters. Small states like Anguilla could have their financial sector regulated out of existence by many of the models that developed countries have been seeking to impose under the guise of eliminating “harmful tax practices”. In recent times however, the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) has put together a Global Forum Working Group that seeks to incorporate all the interests of non-OECD countries in arriving at an effective model for dealing with international tax matters. By involving non-OECD member states in the “rule-setting” process and the design of the model agreements, the OECD has been able through the Working Group to establish a much more level “playing field” for international cooperation in tax matters.

The TIEA that the Chief Minister signed with Canada presents some very interesting possibilities for Anguilla. Canada unlike many other developed countries fully subscribes to the theory that “going international” is healthy for their countries business; that the waiving of tax for legitimate structures is better than loosing it all through money hidden offshore, and; that an incentive process ensures that the cash will ultimately be repatriated to be utilized in the parent country or reinvested thereby stimulating business in general. The new TIEA announcement means that Canadian corporate investors are entitled to exemption from the normal 36% tax in dividends or capital gains received from their subsidiary companies in Anguilla. This can be a very lucrative marketing initiative for Anguilla. Barbados that has always maintained a double taxation agreement with Canada has benefitted from Canadian corporate investors with an estimated CAN$38 billion in 2008. The advantage for Anguilla if we were to pursue this opportunity is that unlike Barbados we do not have local income and capital gains taxes and would therefore be more attractive to Canadian companies operating in our jurisdiction.

The interesting reality is that before 1995 when the Canadian treaty with Anguilla was cancelled we had and still have a number of private and public Canadian companies resident in Anguilla. They are transparent and unaffected by the tax information exchange agreements and make excellent references as models for new companies desirous of taking advantage of the positive legitimate tax savings for their investors. Like in the transshipment initiative it could be beneficial for the GoA to outsource its promotion and business development services to our knowledgeable and well-resourced professionals in Anguilla.

Speaking of Transshipment! I had the opportunity to be a guest on “In Your Face” on Saturday to an open discussion but which for the most part centered around transshipment. I was at pains to explain to my hosts, as well as certain persons who had called in, the course of action that the Government of the day took to pursue the opportunities in the Overseas Countries and Territories Association (OCTA) Agreement 1991 which created that possibility but in my estimation my efforts were in vain. It appeared that the hosts and others were intent on looking for improprieties on the part of the Government of the day rather than trying to understand genuine efforts of that Government to seek out available revenue sources at a time when donor countries had begun to suffer fatigue. On the other hand the European Union maintained a special relationship with the OCT’s as far back as 1957 in Article 131 of the Treaty of Rome where it states:

• “The purpose of association shall be to promote the economic and social development of the countries and territories and to establish close economic relations between them and the community as a whole.

• In accordance with the principles set out in the preamble to this Treaty, association shall serve primarily to further the interests and prosperity of the inhabitants of these countries and territories in order to lead them to the economic, social and cultural development they aspire.”

The very first Article 1 of the 1991 Decision gives a clear and good indication of the Council’s motivation, which reads: “The aim of this Decision is to promote and accelerate the economic cultural and social development and to strengthen the economic structures of the OCT”. It then goes on in Article 101 to describe one of the programs through the international trade sector. As has been pointed out time and time again this provision could not have been achievable without some aid or assistance from the OCT. There can be no doubt that it was up to the OCT to develop its unique program of transshipment if it wished to exploit the opportunity in this Article. That fact is obvious from the different approaches used by St. Pierre and Miquelon, Anguilla and the Netherland Antilles. But the common factor has always been that there had to be incentives. The quantum of those incentives has never been an issue with authorities and traders in the EU member states. It has always been the interpretation of whether or not what was done constituted a refund of customs duty. In fact the decision with which the British Government is now wrangling is the accuracy of the interpretation of the relevant proviso and as a consequence its liability to refund the estimated “losses”.

In my discussions on Saturday night it became obvious that the preoccupation of the hosts was with whether or not the Government of Anguilla had done anything wrong and they then extrapolated that because the Court decision came to that conclusion then it should follow that the GoA willfully and knowingly committed a fraud. For the life of me I am unable to understand why the hosts should go out of their way to support the Commission’s view when Anguilla had clear legal opinions to support its position as well as the approval of the United Kingdom. Unlike actions being taken by this present Government at every stage of the process the Government and in particular the Ministry of Finance followed good governance procedures including appropriate due diligence. In the end I was forced to suggest to one of the hosts that he was in fact making a case for the European Commission against Anguilla when there was solid grounds for our defense.

Upon leaving the Radio Station I gave the main host of the program copies of documents that explained Anguilla’s case as well as our efforts to sway the authorities at the EU/OCT Forum. Those documents clearly showed our thinking and our willingness to defend our actions at the highest level. I was therefore extremely surprised to hear that same host on another talk show on Monday night with a host who exhibits more passion than substance in his poor attempts at being a journalist. The conversation that ensued before I found other useful distractions included a statement by one of the callers that he felt there was something suspicious about transshipment when he saw Customs Officers and other officials preparing to board one of the vessels after midnight. Obviously, that caller did not realize that the nature of the transshipment arrangements required precision such that whatever time of day or night the vessel arrived the customs inspection process had to take place. The discussion that followed seemed to suggest that somebody in that Government should be held responsible for paying back the funds and one could sense that the implication was the former Minister of Finance.

As the discussions proceeded and the usual callers had their say I suddenly experienced an epiphany. It came to me that: “The talk about transshipment to day and in the past has nothing to do with whether or not the payments made constitute a refund of customs duty; has nothing to do with whether or not the British has liability for the refund of losses; has nothing to do with whether or not transshipment received the approval of the UK Government; has nothing to do with whether or not transshipment brought significant revenues to the Government of Anguilla, and; has nothing to do with whether or not there are grounds to appeal the EU Court decision. What really matters to many of those persons involved in this debate is that there is the feeling that someone made “a lot of money” and most importantly it was not them! May be I am late with my epiphany --- some of my readers may have already arrived at that conclusion!

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
November 9, 2010

His Excellency…

The recent announcement that prisoners in the United Kingdom (UK) will be given the right to vote, for the first time in 140 years, simply represents a case of government bowing to the inevitable - the fact that a few decisions should be put beyond the reach of mere parliamentary majorities - as the Cabinet Office minister Mark Harper succinctly stated: "This is not a choice, it is a legal obligation."

In October 2004, the European Court of Human Rights declared that a ban on all sentenced prisoners in the UK from voting was discriminatory and breached the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court emphasized that the right to vote should be withdrawn only in exceptional situations where the offence related to an abuse of a public position or a threat to undermine the rule of law. This means, that there needed to be a direct link between the offence committed and the decision to disenfranchise.

Since then, the British government’s lengthy public consultations serves nothing more than a delaying tactic in order to avoid taking the necessary steps to rectify such a breach, and failed to implement any changes.

The decision by the British Government to tell the Court of Appeal that the law will be changed following legal advice that the taxpayers could have to pay tens of millions of pounds in compensation may very well anger those who may see this as a step closer in politicizing the judiciary and overriding the possibility of government policy being made in the light of public discussion in the press and parliament, basically shutting down democratic debate - a decision which brings to an end six years of government attempts to avoid the issue while opening the possibility that even those facing life sentences for very serious crimes could in future shape elections.

In light of this development, and as a British Overseas Territory/Dependency - urgent action allowing prisoners to vote on Anguilla is inevitable. To act otherwise may see our taxpayers happening to pay millions of dollars in compensation for such breach of human rights, and further embarrass the UK Government - with potential sanctions include suspension or expulsion from the Council of Europe.

The Government of Anguilla must act positively now, even if thinking that the right to vote is not a human right issue, but rather a civil right, as has been the British tradition; or affirm their incompetence by an Order-In-Council.

And while we are at it - His Excellency must annul the mockery and FREE Mr. Paul Petty. After all, life sentence must mean: a defined period in a life time – not until death. Our prisons must be centers for rehabilitation rather than centers for chastisement rivaling capital punishment.

Mr. Petty has served with distinction and it’s time that we honour such… set him FREE.

Sincerely

“YOU AH GON TIRED FI SEE MI FACE!”

Let me take this opportunity to offer my heartfelt condolences to the people of Barbados on the passing of their distinguished Prime Minister, the Right Honourable David Thompson. I must also wish them all well --- as they strive to recover from the ravages of Hurricane Tomas, an experience that I shared since I happened to be in Barbados at that time. I have been told that the Honourable Chief Minister was also in Barbados, however, unlike him it took me several days to get back to Anguilla as a result of the many flight cancellations and delays.

My happiness to be finally back in Anguilla was soon dulled by the irksome monotone of the Chief Minister on the car radio as he struggled through what sounded like a written press statement explaining his reasons for returning to Anguilla so urgently on Sunday. I was impressed by his readiness to respond to a letter from the FCO (Foreign & Commonwealth Office) by flying in from Barbados to fly out again when his Senior Staff could have easily supplied all the documentation requested from the files in the Ministry of Finance. Ironically, he was not so cooperative in supplying information to the FCO Minister on a personal request. In fact he openly stated that he was not going to respond.

Since he came to Office the Chief Minister has been talking about the transshipment operation in Anguilla in an effort to suggest that there are grounds for investigation with regards the manner in which the operations took place in Anguilla, particularly, on the local government level. He continues to pursue this on any forum where he can find an entrance to make slanted accusations of corruption. When I listened to his radio broadcast, I was very anxious to get a copy of the correspondence from the FCO that was sent to him and which prompted his urgent return to Anguilla. His comments were very “ill-advised”, because not having the shelter of the House of Assembly on this occasion, he made some very libelous statements regarding departments of Government which imply corrupt practices by officers who worked there at the time. In particular, he made the statement that “the treasury continued to mismanage these funds despite warnings from the Permanent Secretary” and he proceeded to imply that over US$100,000 was missing from each trip also claiming that this continued for a total of eleven trips. This computes to a total of US$1.1 million.

While I will deal with his direct references to me through the judicial system with more resolve than I have in the past, I am very upset about his reckless and unfounded accusations of the diligent and hardworking staff in the Ministry of Finance, the Treasury and Customs. These officers have not been found to have mismanaged anything in connection with transshipment --- they have simply done their jobs following the directions from Executive Council and the approval of the relevant authorities. It is patently unfair that in an effort to make a political point that is totally unrelated to the request from the FCO for the Chief Minister to so readily attack innocent officials in the public service many who have already retired.

There is absolutely no truth to the statement that funds have been missing or mismanaged and the several investigations by the Her Majesty’s Customs & Excise UK (HMC&E UK) and later the EU Mission to Anguilla on Transshipment in May 2003 did not reveal any such situations. In fact, during the EU-OCT Forum in Bonaire in 2002, former Governor of Anguilla, Mr. Peter Johnstone during his intervention stated that whatever difference of interpretation may exist on the matter of past transshipments “I can assure the Commission that past transshipments from Anguilla to the EC did not involve any theft, fraud or deceit.” On every occasion the Government of Anguilla have been extremely cooperative with any request by qualified external agencies to look in the operations of transshipment on Anguilla. In fact, we have been the main presenters amongst the OCT’s on all aspects of this issue in the European Commission.

Before I go on to speak to the specific issues raised in the letter to the Chief Minister and what they mean --- let me speak to the statement made by the Chief Minister that a company in which I was a fifty percent owner, namely, Superior Sanitary Supplies was the agent for the vessel doing the transshipment. I find it extremely curious that the Chief Minister should persist in this lie knowing full well that the HM Custom & Excise investigation states clearly, in describing their account of the actions taken by the Anguilla Customs Service in relation to the OCT shipments, that Trans-Atlantic Shipping Ltd was the agent for the vessels. This is recorded in section 3. 2. where the procedure is described as follows:

• “Customs are informed of the impending arrival of a vessel by the Anguillian shipping agent, Trans-Atlantic Shipping Ltd., who then lodge import entries for each importer. Trans-Atlantic Shipping Ltd. act on behalf of Gearbulk Ltd, the owner of the vessel.

• When the vessel arrives in Anguillian territorial waters (these extend for 3 miles) she is boarded by Police and Customs Officers, together with a representative from Trans-Atlantic Shipping. The Master of the vessel and the Customs Officer boarding the vessel then sign a ship position report stating the vessels exact position within Anguillian territorial waters. In addition, a “Statement of Facts” is completed and signed by the shipping agent, the Master of the vessel and the Officer boarding the vessel. This documents various times including the time the vessel dropped and weighed anchor. This documentation exists for all OCT transshipment vessels.

• The cargo is inspected by the Customs Officer, who, when satisfied, radios ashore where the import entries are then cleared. ‘The Comptroller of Customs’ stated that clearance only takes place once he has received confirmation from the Bank of Anguilla that the full amount of duty has been deposited into the Government’s consolidated fund.

• Following the departure of the vessel from Anguilla, Export Certificates were presented to Customs and returned to Corbis Trading Ltd. ‘The Comptroller of Customs’ stated that the Customs Department do not manage the consolidated fund and therefore it would be impossible for his department to make payments in respect of these OCT transshipments.”

I have quoted this entire section from the report of the investigation carried out by HM Customs & Excise into the OCT shipment transactions to provide the background for the following key points in addition to the important point that the agent for the vessels was not a company in which I was involved. Firstly, the agent for the vessel makes arrangements for its visit and submits the import duty entries; secondly, the vessel carrying the goods is anchored in Anguillian waters and boarded by the relevant authorities and a representative of the agent; fourthly, the goods are inspected by Customs and cleared after the entire amount of duty is paid into the consolidated fund, and; finally the export certificates are endorsed by customs.

The report was done on the request of the FCO with the full agreement of the GOA and when they arrived they met in an extraordinary meeting of Executive Council where the GOA confirmed that there would be “complete transparency” and full cooperation with the inquiries. In the circumstances GOA expected that the findings of the report would be discussed before it was sent to the EU Commission. Nevertheless, it was sent to the Commission where it was further circulated to EU Member States without the GOA being given the opportunity to respond. GOA made the point in protest that this did not conform to the provisions of the OCT Decision 91/ 482 regarding administrative cooperation.

The final outcome was that a number of Member States “latched on” to the section that concluded “the direct link between the rate of payment under the contract and the size of each consignment, the existence of a unique export shipping allowance and the change in the invoicing system after the first few shipments all suggest that the operation of the system was, in substance, designed to refund duty”. It was on this basis that Italian, Dutch and Belgium Customs decided not to accept Export certificates (EXP’s) issued by the Government of Anguilla contending that they were invalid because of the conclusion in the HM C&E report that it constituted a “refund of duty.”

This is the background to the letter that the Chief Minister received from the FCO. It appears that Italy was the only Member State that pursued this matter to the European Court and received a judgment in its favour against the transshipment operations through Anguilla in 1998-99. This is a matter that began in 2002 and which continued to be a difference of opinion between the OCT’s involved in transshipment; individual member states and EU Commission regarding the meaning of the term “refund of duty” in the context of the Article 101 (2) of the EU/OCT arrangement which provides that “Products not originating in the OCT but which are in free circulation in an OCT and are re-exported as such to the Community shall be accepted for import into the Community free of customs duties and taxes having equivalent effect”. The proviso being that duty is paid that is equivalent to or more than the revenue collected by EU Customs Services; the goods have not been subject to an exemption or refund in whole or in part, and; they are accompanied by an Export Certificate (EXP).

On receiving a copy of the letter that the Chief Minister received from the FCO, I realized that they were simply requesting information regarding the transshipment operations in 1998 and 1999. This information would assist them in determining whether the ruling by the European Court supporting the claim by Italian authorities for a refund of lost resources is justified. Nowhere does the letter go into any matters related to any kind of mismanagement or missing funds. This is just another attempt by the Chief Minister to malign persons for his own political aggrandizement. Let me quote the part of the correspondence where the Chief Minister’s support is being sought. “The UK Government has not yet responded formally to this decision and we have asked for evidence to support the claim. Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs in the UK are reviewing the documentation sent by the European Commission to support their decision. We are also in contact with the UK Representative in Brussels. In order to establish that the claim is justified, it would be helpful if you could provide us, via the Governor’s Office, with any documentation regarding the transshipment of aluminium in Anguilla in 1999, when you were Chief Minister.”

The situation being described here is a technical one. There are no accusations being made by the FCO about any wrong doing on the part of Anguillian officials or anyone else. This is simply a continuation of a battle we have been fighting for many years with the Commission and in particular EU member states who do not have any Overseas Territories to benefit from transshipment. We have also been encouraging the UK Government to support us effectively on these issues and we have in fact been getting very positive support from them especially since 2002. In fact recent UK Representatives in Brussels assigned to the OT’s had provided much needed technical assistance for our efforts to get approval for a new transshipment proposal and to deal with the residual issues, including the matter with the Italian authorities, now being discussed. The approach the Chief Minister is adopting may get him some political mileage but the matter of the technical arguments underpinning the ruling in favour of granting a refund must be contested in the context of the purpose and intent of Article 102 (2) of the EU-OCT Decision and the correct interpretation of its provisions.

The Chief Minister as he gleefully makes these accusations must reflect that it was his Government that benefitted from some US$ 42 million in transshipment revenues in 1998 and 1999. And that this revenue was the source of the surplus he boasts of having left when he lost the Government in 2000. In this challenging period he should also be trying to win the assistance of the FCO in dealing with the worse case scenario in the matter. There may even be the possibility of negotiating directly with the Italian authorities to get some leniency should all else fail.

Finally, may I admonish the Chief Minister that it is unwise to believe that his continued attempts to denigrate my character will cause me to wilt or go away. As the late great Honourable Robert Nesta “Bob” Marley wrote so eloquently in the Jamaican vernacular: “You ah gon tired fi see me face!”

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
November 2, 2010