SABOTAGE! SABOTAGE!

L to R: BVI Premier Ralph O'Neal, Montserrat Hon. Charles Kirnon,
Cayman Islands Premier W. McKeeva Bush, Anguilla Chief Minister
Hubert Hughes and BVI Governor Boyd McCleary

Last week the airways were inundated with comments from the Chief Minister in the wake of what he has described as on going efforts by the Opposition, the Governor, the Deputy Governor and the British Government to sabotage his Government. His press conference of Thursday, August 18 almost evoked my sympathy when I first heard his sluggish and disjointed presentation. It gave the impression that he was under severe stress and he actually sounded quite despondent. However, by the time he developed his “web of lies and half-truths” I realized that this was the same “Hubert” employing another one of his “stunts” with “smoke and mirrors” to explain away the inability of his Government to fulfill its empty promises to the people of Anguilla. At no time did he take responsibility for anything that has gone wrong since his Government ascended to office. As usual the Chief Minister at no point allowed the truth and the facts to stop him from constructing these conspiracy theories predicated on lies. I have wondered whether his lying is pathological. Because it is apparent that he believes his own fabrications. And he never stops repeating them even after they have been proven to be totally untrue. Let me lift three blatant lies from his August 18th Press Conference that illustrate this pattern of behaviour:-

1) He sets about creating a historical basis for his conspiracy theory by suggesting that the British Government threw him out of office unconstitutionally in 2000. Those of you who remember the circumstances of the Chief Minister’s demise in 2000 will recall that on the basis of my resignation from our coalition Government in 1999 he ended up with a minority government which could not meet the quorum requirement for a sitting of the House of Assembly, based on the Constitution. But Mr. Hughes was content to carry on a Government, which did not comprise a majority of elected members simply to hold on to power. This is the same Hubert Hughes who talks about democracy and good governance. Can we have good governance and democracy when a minority claims to be the legitimate government? The FCO did not throw Hubert Hughes out of office unconstitutionally. Mr. Hughes fought to hang on to power by taking the Speaker of the House of Assembly to Court for refusing to carry on the business of the House without a quorum. Mr. Hughes lost on this constitutional matter in the High Court! It was the High Court that ruled that the Speaker acted constitutionally not the FCO. As a consequence Mr. Hughes could not effectively govern and was obliged to demit office. Mr. Hughes should cease to perpetuate this lie. The facts do not bear out this falsehood.

2) He says that the Anguilla United Front Government did not have a single surplus for any one of the ten years it was in office. He uses this construction to suggest that the past Government did not manage the affairs of the country, efficiently. I believe that the officials in the Ministry of Finance must shudder either at the ignorance, which such a statement implies or at the dishonesty that such a claim suggests. The Government of Anguilla’s Budgetary Performance for the period in question clearly shows recurrent surpluses in five of those years beginning in 2003, until the recession took hold in 2008. Four of these annual surpluses were in double digit millions. The source of all these figures is the Treasury Department for which the Chief Minister is responsible. He also neglects to mention in his analysis the fact that during that period the Anguilla United Front Government built up reserves of approximately EC$65 million. (This figure includes some EC$25 million due to the recurrent account from EDF) It is obvious that Chief Minister is deliberately lying so as to make the point that he inherited a financial situation unrelated to the global financial crisis. He then goes on further to give credence to this view by claiming that his visit to London shortly after ascending to office was to seek reparations from the British Government for their role in aiding and abetting the destruction of the Anguillian economy. The facts in the reports from his Treasury Department, suggest that there is absolutely no basis for such statements.

3) The Chief Minister said at his press conference, that he brought Mr. Rizzuto, the owner of Cuisinart to Anguilla from Connecticut. It does not bother him that the facts on file clearly indicate that Mr. Rizzuto entered into an MOU with Sir Emile’s government in 1994. It was in fact, Mr. Keith “Tamper” Gumbs who encouraged Mr. Rizzuto to invest in Anguilla. The land was already acquired by the time the ADP/AUM coalition government ascended to office in 1994 and Mr. Hughes simply went to Connecticut to be “wined and dined” by Mr. Rizzuto as the incoming Chief Minister. The Chief Minister is again trying to paint a picture of being responsible for bringing a successful developer to Anguilla. And gave everyone the impression that he could guarantee that the Temenos Project would be developed on his terms. After having been unable to deliver on such promises he does not blame himself for not getting the deal done; for that matter neither does he even blame Mr. Rizzuto --- instead he blames the Governor. Why? Because he saw Mr. Rizzuto “wining and dining” the Governor! My question is: Why is it okay for the CM to fly to Connecticut to be “wined and dined” and the Governor cannot have a social meeting with a major investor without being accused of selling out Anguilla for the biblical “mess of potage”?

Having clearly established in my column last week that the Chief Minister has no problem in telling the most vicious lies and then apologizing, let me explain to you why I have chosen these particular lies to illustrate a further point. In the first example he claimed that he was forced out of office unconstitutionally --- in this instance he conveniently dismisses the role of the Judiciary in his decision to demit office. Rather he insists that it was the fault of the British Government. In the second example he claims that the AUF administration never had a surplus budget during its ten years in office --- in this instance he ignores official Government statistics so as to show that the past government caused the financial and economic situation on Anguilla. He concludes that the British Government aided and abetted this mismanagement therefore he has the right to seek reparations. And in the third example he claims that he brought a successful developer to Anguilla --- in this instance he is claiming responsibility for the positive outcome of the Cuisinart Project while ignoring the contributions of everyone else. However, he now insists that the breakdown in the present negotiations with the same developer is the fault of the Governor.

This and other statements made on several talk shows recently has caused many persons to question the mental state of the Chief Minister. Indeed his behaviour may suggest a fixation with the British Government and an irrational tendency to blame HMG for all of his problems. The point I am making is that these lies have in fact created a reality for the Chief Minister, which he has fully “bought into” and apparently genuinely believes. But there also appears to be some method to his madness. The careful observer may have noticed that the underlying reason for this recent flurry of press conferences, radio shows and planned public meetings is to explain why after eighteen months his Government has not been able to get the country moving. His answer? You guessed it! “The British Government has sabotaged his plan for Anguilla’s development!”

But let me posit a few questions, which may be instructive in analyzing the Chief Minister’s conduct:

Why is it that the Chief Minister believes that two separate British Governments are colluding to sabotage development in Anguilla? Why is the Labour Party; the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party all colluding against Anguilla?

What does a major super power like the United Kingdom have to benefit from destroying little Anguilla?

Why is it that everything that the Chief Minister has been saying seems to be making the case for independence?

Why does the Chief Minister prefer to take every dispute with public or private sector personalities to the airwaves rather than resolve them professionally and in an atmosphere of mutual respect? As a good friend of mine declares: “He is a “broad pa” man!

Why does the Chief Minister believe so strongly that the French are his benefactors and is therefore willing to allow them to control water; electricity and an airport facility for Anguilla?

Why does the Chief Minister believe that the British Government does the bidding of David Carty; Victor F. Banks; and other members of the Anguilla United Front?

Why should the Chief Minister look out of his office window and notice that the Secretariat grounds are being tidied up, and because he did not request it --- he then concludes that the Anguilla United Front is still running the Government?

I presented these behavioural traits to three persons with training in psychological profiling one on Anguilla; one in the United States and one at a Caribbean university. They all came up with the same diagnosis: “that person has “borderline personality disorder!” Being myself not fully acquainted with the definition for that condition I asked them each to give me some symptoms, which I could use as a checklist. I was then able to check a few of them against the Chief Minister’s behaviour as follows:

a) The person is in a constant state of crisis and chaos. The Chief Minister does not seem happy unless he has something to argue and fight about. That is why he has earned the name “confusion Hubert”!

b) The hallmark of such a person is that they tend to be dramatic, emotional and inconsistent. The Chief Minister is an expert on dramatizing situations and is famous for being inconsistent in his arguments and presentations.

c) The person has a tendency to be self-destructive and impulsive. The Chief Minister has been thrown out of three governments and then broke up his own Government.

d) The common defences of such a person is “splitting”. When he wishes to defend a position the Chief Minister “pits” one person against the other. For example to denigrate his experiences with members of the AUF in his political career he said that the most comfortable time he spent in Government was the eleven months he spent with the Hon. Ronald Webster’s Government in 1980. Everyone knows that he was thrown out of that Government but now he sees an opportunity to play to the diehard Webster supporters by rewriting that chapter of political history.

e) The person has a tendency to categorize people or situations as either fabulous or dreadful --- polar opposite descriptions. The Chief Minister has said at one time that I was the best Finance Minister in the Caribbean, now I am the worst. He describes certain people he favours as decent and others as corrupt when it suits his purposes. And those descriptions can change in a very short time.

f) The person has a tendency to have mini-psychotic episodes, that is, brief periods of loss of contact with reality. Very often the Chief Minister has embarrassed his colleagues by making “way-out” statements. Like his rants about an undeclared war against Anguilla or that Anguilla can colonize Guyana.

The person has a tendency to cultivate love-hate relationships. There is no more loyal British Citizen than the Chief Minister yet he denounces them everyday. And truth be told --- I strongly believe that he loves David Carty and myself.

I believe that I have clearly shown that we have a problem here. Last week I suggested that it is time for the Chief Minister to stop his rhetoric and lies. This week after hearing his pitiful cries about the sabotage of his Government and his “invisible plan” I have been moved to conclude that he needs attention.

One of my younger buddies said to me when he heard the press conference: “I did not know that the Chief Minister was an Exodus fan! I hear him on the radio sounding like ‘Latest’ talking ‘bout “Sabotage!! Sabotage!! Lord have mercy!! --- According to ‘Shunkee’, dis country really need Navigation! Bwoy!”

By: Victor F. Banks

Victor Banks is a former Finance, Economics, Commerce and Tourism Minister on Anguilla. He is presently the leader of the Oposition Anguilla United Front Party, author and writer of a weekly political article for the Anguillian News Paper, lyricist, and a self-employed entrepreneur.

“….. OF MOA’s, MOU’s AND BUSH DEALS!”

Let me begin my column this week with a direct excerpt from a public apology delivered over radio and submitted in a signed statement by the Chief Minister, Hubert B. Hughes in 1999. I am moved to include this excerpt because I continue to be concerned about the large volume of lies, half-truths and innuendos, which the Chief Minister propagates regularly in an effort to shore up the rapidly deteriorating image of his Government. I will quote that statement here in part, as follows:

“I Hubert Hughes of South Hill, in the island of Anguilla, hereby wholeheartedly and sincerely apologise to the Honorable Victor F. Banks, Member for Valley South and the Honorable Osbourne Fleming, leader of the Opposition and Member for East End Constituency for any embarrassment, loss of right or pain that I have caused them by the statements I made on Radio Anguilla on Friday 2nd July, 1999 over Radio Anguilla and to the members of the press on the said day.

I wish to fully and unconditionally withdraw all allegations I made against the personal characters of Mr. Victor F. Banks and Mr. Osbourne Fleming, for the avoidance of any doubt I wish to categorically state that I have no records, or any evidence and or knowledge that either Mr. Osbourne Fleming or Mr. Victor F. Banks are guilty of any misconduct, corrupt practices or any criminal wrong doings.”

After stating thirteen specific points on which he admits to lying the CM then concludes with the following statement:

“I deeply regret any pain that I may have caused Mr. Banks or Mr. Fleming as well as their families and their constituencies. I apologise to them for any damage or hurt that I have caused them as a result of the statements I made on July 2nd, 1999 over Radio Anguilla. I deeply regret making these statements, which are untrue and I do apologise for them. I understand that any future repetition of these statements in any form or like status will result in immediate Court action. Thank You!”

You may be interested in knowing that on that occasion Mr. Hughes, in addition to his public apology paid our legal fees, the amount presented being EC$ 20,000. We took no funds from Mr. Hughes --- he paid our lawyers. One would expect that this would cause Mr. Hughes to be more responsible --- but yet again on 28th July 2000 he went on Radio Anguilla and made similar statements against me. I then proceeded to file Suit No. 30 of 2000 in the High Court against Mr. Hughes. Again our lawyers negotiated and he paid my legal fees to the tune of US$3,000 and I requested that he make a contribution to the Anguilla Community Foundation on my behalf. I left it up to his discretion and he made a contribution of EC$ 1,000.

The reason why I am belaboring these incidents is because Mr. Hughes continues to believe that he can continue to denigrate his opponents in the sanctuary of the House of Assembly with the same old lies he perpetuates. And on occasion at his press conferences he comes perilously close to making libelous statements by using the shelter of legal language, which apparently his lawyers have advised. This week in his press conference he used the opportunity to insult Permanent Secretaries in a roundabout manner and on the other hand praise them by implying that unlike the past Government he values their expertise. All of this in an apparent effort to deflect attention away from real issues with both the Flag Project and Viceroy, which clearly indicate that things are not going right. Furthermore, he carefully skirts with slander by suggesting that two ministers in the past Government signed MOA’s “in the bush” while he has utilized technical staff in the public service for such negotiations. We are taking legal advice on that statement. However, I must point out the lies and hypocrisy in his presentation in light of the situation with the Government today.

This Government boasted during and after the election campaign of their adherence to the principles of transparency and good governance. I have pointed out the selectiveness of that claim in several of my columns and press statements and must do so again as I speak to the Viceroy and the Flag/Temenos negotiations. Let me also encourage you to reflect on the whole discussion of MOA’s and MOU’s and I will demonstrate that there is no substantive difference to the legal weighting of any of these once they bear the Chief Minister’s signature. In fact, an almost irrefutable case can be made for their legality even if the Chief Minister has not been duly authorized to sign by Executive Council.

Lets start with Viceroy! We were very happy two weeks ago to hear that the Viceroy deal was consummated. In fact, in my column I listed it as good news and an opportunity for the Chief Minister and his colleagues to turn things around while we wait for the rest of the world. At the time I made an estimate that based on the sale price we would get a windfall revenue of over EC$50 million. I had calculated that figure on a sale price of US$165 million with a mandatory 5% transfer tax and a reasonably negotiated Alien Land Holding Licence fee of around 8%. Unfortunately, the lack of transparency by certain members of the Government have come back to haunt us. And as a consequence it is being estimated that we may lose as much as EC$19 million in revenue.

Let me explain! In my article of September 24th, 2010 entitled: “So Shall It Be In The End” I mentioned that on Friday July 30th, 2010 in a press conference reported in the Anguillian, the Chief Minister and his son the Parliamentary Secretary, Haydn Hughes reported that an MOU was signed for the sale of Viceroy with Starwood Capital Group and the new buyer would be paying US$40 million in taxes to the Government. I made the following statement in my article: “What was most ironic about this press statement is that whereas the AUM politicos in the recent election campaign had been accusing the former Government of conducting their negotiations in secret here are they now presenting an MOU negotiated by HAYDN alone! In fact after this press statement a number of Ministers of the Government denied having any knowledge of the transaction and in particular the MOU. Transparency Indeed!”

The other interesting thing about the MOU was that it was written on Starwood Capital Group letterhead, signed by the Chief Minister and witnessed by a senior official in the Ministry of Finance. And the final clause, below the terms and above the signatures, reads as follows: “Understood, Authorized and Agreed.” In my article I extracted four specific clauses from the MOU, which the CM purports to have been negotiated by the Parliamentary Secretary, and commented on them. For the purposes of this discussion I will only deal with the first one as follows: “He fixed the value of the real estate for the purposes of calculation of the various stamp duty and alien land holding license fees as not to exceed US$105 million. My comment: Revenue will be lost if the value exceeds US$105. Even if that were considered to be unlikely, given the circumstances of the sale it would have been a better deal to set a minimum rather than a maximum.”

Someone said to me yesterday: “You mussa got goat mouth!” The reason for this comment of course is that I predicted that the terms of “Haydn’s Negotiated MOU” could result in the Government losing money. In fact, close to EC$19 million has been lost by this particular clause. So instead of the Chief Minister’s boast in the press conference that he had appointed his son to “redeem some of the taxes lost under the previous MOA” --- the opposite is the case.

Fast forwarding to the present, we now find ourselves in a situation where this same unauthorized MOU has restricted the Government’s negotiating capacity despite the fact that they subsequently used the Tourism Investment Committee (TIC) established by the AUF Government to rectify the blunders. Interestingly, in his recent press conference the Chief Minister ironically accused the same AUF Government (all of whose MOA’s were approved by EXCO and negotiated with the TIC) of signing MOU’s in “the bush”. One could legitimately ask the question where was the July 27th 2010, MOU with Starwood Capital Group (SCG) and the Government of Anguilla (GOA) signed and negotiated? Since a number of Ministers of the AUM Government denied having any knowledge of the transaction. Could “in the bush” be a plausible answer?

Lets now look at the Temenos Resort & Golf Course. The rumors have been rampant over the past week regarding the breakdown in negotiations between the GOA and Mr. Rizzuto, the owner of Cuisinart Resort & Spa on the MOU for moving forward on its acquisition of Temenos Resort (Also called the Flag Project) some two months ago. Mr. Rizzuto has been a longstanding and respected developer on the island and while many of us were concerned about the low auction price we were happy with the fact that the Chief Minister who is normally tough on expatriate developers seemed almost to be in a “love affair” with Mr. Rizzuto. In my article of June 17th entitled: “And wid a lotta sauce!” I said : “The point that must be made is that the sale of the Golf Course Project at any price is just the beginning of the process. The Government must now negotiate a business plan with the developer that is contingent on the appropriate responses to the issues raised above as well as others. It must be remembered that Mr. Rizzuto has acquired an asset legally free and clear of all encumbrances. He is not obliged to recognize any of the other creditors. However, Government must use its leverage along with moral suasion to achieve the best outcomes for its people. The Chief Minister must adopt the “wait and see” approach that “the victory is not yet ours!” He should be careful not to shout: “Mission accomplished!” Let the Salamander experience, be his guide!”

Again the comment: “You mussa got goat mouth!” There have been no documents presented to substantiate the positive statements regarding Mr. Rizzuto’s agreement to conditions, which the Chief Minister has been boasting about. However, a number of members of the Government have assured their supporters that Mr. Rizzuto had agreed to providing US$5 million to Anguillian creditors; had agreed to build a four star hotel; and would start construction in three months. It has been my stated position that Mr. Rizzuto did not become an extremely rich man by being careless with his investments and I have questioned the CM’s contention that he had agreed to all his terms. What seems clear from the rumors is that Mr. Rizzuto has decided that his letter of November 15, 2010 to the Chief Minister was based on certain assurances, which have changed given the nature of the global economy and the fact that he has now acquired the property in a public auction free and clear of all encumbrances.

Because of the lack of documentation I will not venture to discuss what appears to be a clear “break down” in the relationship between the Chief Minister and Mr. Rizzuto. However, I will extract one statement from Mr. Rizzuto’s letter to the CM on November 15, 2010, which may be instructive. It reads as follows: “I have taken your word and promise and I am investing in people to move quickly on this project but I am hearing a lot of different rumors which I like to discard and hope that I have been awarded the project. …… I will be in Anguilla from December 1 – 6, 2010 and hopefully we can sign an agreement at this time and get started.”

It is apparent from his letter that Mr. Rizzuto was given certain assurances by the Chief Minister which gave him a level of confidence that he could be awarded the project in short order and on the Chief Minister’s say so. What were those assurances and when were they made? How should one interpret the other aspects of the letter, which clearly indicate that the CM does not understand the importance of “arms length negotiations” in the face of a transaction, which could have legal ramifications for the Government of Anguilla? At the end of the day the Chief Minister must take some responsibility in particular for the fact that at such a low price, so few investors from an original field of sixty–four, purported to have an interest, only a few came to the auction table. Why such a lack of confidence in Anguilla as a jurisdiction for investment? Does this have anything to do with the CM’s style, approach and attitude? Or is it a response to a growing reputation for incompetence and lack of transparency in the governance process over the last eighteen months? What did the CM say about “bush deals”? Where was the TIC in all of this?

I started off by making the point that the Chief Minister has an established reputation for lying. And by his own admission! I then went on to explain that whether we call them MOA’s, MOU’s or “bush deals”, agreements between investors and Government must be honoured. So whatever the Chief Minister concocts to cover his incompetence --- the people of Anguilla are still waiting for substantive solutions to their plight. Chief Minister, it is time to stop trying to fool Anguillians by silly talk of MOA’s, MOU’s and “Bush Deals”! It is time Chief Minister, to stop the rhetoric and lies! Anguillians are fed up!

Victor F. Banks

Sachasses Estate

August 16, 2011

ANGUILLA: Not a Business Friendly Environment

Anguilla Summer Fest is the island’s grand annual event which is generating wide spread interest in the region, the combination of Jouvert Morning and the August Monday beach party has made August Monday a massive event and growing. Obviously, it was a very good business decision to combine the two activities which for that day, makes Anguilla the number one destination in the immediate region and the biggest festival of all. August Monday has again put the island in the spotlight in a major way, and quite noticeably a serious mix of all nations have embarked on Anguilla for this national event. The over one hundred nationalities on St Maarten / St Martin and of course the exceptional Dutch / French SXM native massive, which has made the Anguilla August Monday event their very own continues to dominate the event, actually overwhelming the ferry service for that day. The Festival Office must be congratulated for its work and in particular the crowd control which is a growing spectacle, but appears to result in very little incidence of violence or disorder. The Government must also be commended for issuing what was called, “relaxing of the immigration rules” for the Festival; it is believed that this has contributed very favorably to the overall success of the festival.

The Carnival activities, together with the August Monday fest in particular, should give us on Anguilla an indication of what a thriving business environment requires to produce success, especially in our commercial zone, which can boost our economic base. One day! makes quite a difference when we experience an instant magnitude of buying power. Many like me, have questioned why Anguilla has not yet deliberately structured a business environment that would usher the island into modern day shopping and commerce, which offers more direct economic power. Just the value of strategic marketing which, actually bring buying power to the business would change the economic structure of the island. More people chose to visit and vacation on islands that foster business development and offer variety in shopping. This is a very noticeable trend, and our governments should take a cue from our own people, who rather incur extraordinary cost to go to St Martin/St. Maarten to shop and purchase items that could well be bought on Anguilla, St. Martin / St. Maarten is now deem the mega shopping destination in the region. For Anguillians, when all costs are calculated, there is no way that the item can be bought less expensive on St Martin. So it is a given fact that people travel to St. Maarten / St. Martin not only to purchase, but more so for the “friendly business environment.”

We often wonder, will Anguilla ever become business friendly? Where we experience a thriving business community attracting satisfactory numbers to improve the viability of our economy, and offer our visitors the attraction to doing serious shopping on the island. We had never fostered an organized shopping environment, and therefore we have reason, always, to catch the first boat leaving port. It is probably past time that we usher in a new era in business development and create a new and improved business environment. We need to start with our very own people by encourage and promoting a new level of entrepreneurship where our young people are encouraged to start their own businesses, together with a well planned and structured minor foreign element to bring in, that variety and extra boost . It might be a relic of our colonial past that we prefer a hard labor economy and not to indulge in modern day contemporary commerce! The state of our business environment would indicate that we have not quickly adapted any modern standards in the structure of our commerce ideology.

The initiative to combine two cultural island activities into one mega fest and commercial extravaganza bringing the kind of success we are witnessing on August Monday, should motivate us to organize and improve our business environment, which will be guaranteed attraction for new visitors and other types of vacationers to our island all year round.“Anguilla is not a business friendly environment!” and this is quite noticeable when we drive into our business block after making that roundabout off of the airport and George Hill main. The lack of a composed business environment to meet the full demand of the people of Anguilla, and making our visitors and customers happy to find exactly what they are looking for and much more, clearly makes Anguilla, “Not a Business Friendly Environment.”

By: By Elliot J. Harrigan

“DON'T STOP THE CARNIVAL!”

Last week, the events associated with the Anguilla Summer Festival took place without any reports of serious violent acts or major accidents, either on land or sea. However, it came to my attention at the time of writing, that there was a shooting incident in Blowing Point on Monday evening. It is my hope that the victim did not suffer any serious injury and that the culprit or culprits will be brought to justice.

To many persons of my age and orientation the best that we can hope for is a safe and incident free celebration --- this year’s festival was certainly that. Everyone will have different views as to whether the Summer Festival was a success --- it is merely a matter of opinion. The events in the Village that I actually attended were the Calypso Monarch Show and the Leeward Islands Calypso Competition. It is my opinion that they were both exceptional.

Boat Race fans had to be particularly disappointed with the wind conditions, which fluctuated from too much to too little over the week. Obviously, neither of these conditions is suitable for boat racing, a testimony to that fact was the race on Sunday which finished long after sunset. But despite the absence of a boat race on August Monday and the inclement weather which challenged the revelers, the Caribbean’s Most Popular Beach Party received rave reviews. Obviously, Hurricane or no Hurricane --- they all were determined that nothing would stop the Carnival. Not Emily! Not even a fully blown recession!

As I said in my last article, what makes the Summer Festival is the participation of people. I am referring to people as audiences; people as performers; people as producers; people as sponsors; people as vendors; people as service providers; and people who maintain safety and security. I questioned whether the global recession would in any way impact the quality of the celebrations. And one of my follow up questions was whether the usual revelers would put aside their worries to participate in the J’ouvert jam and the other amusements. I would suggest that despite the challenges there was little evidence that residents and visitors appeared to be the least bit “put off” by these harsh realities. Everyone seemed to relish the distractions, which the Summer Festival provided.

For helping to create an environment for release and regeneration, I must commend all the people who I referred to earlier, without exception. For me in particular, there were two aspects of that week which made a difference. The first difference for me was that our troupe, the Valley Community Troupe, decided that we would take a break this year because of the financial fatigue of sponsors and of our members. We also felt that, having had a long and distinguished record as champions, (not intending to sound immodest) it would be good for the morale of other troupes to have a chance to aspire to the winner’s circle. We are pleased that there is a new “first time” champion this year. But on a personal note, as a result of that decision, I had the opportunity to rest an aging body and empathize from afar off with other such senior citizens who were not so fortunate to escape the rigors of an animated parade on the hot and humid streets of Valley Central. While colleagues and contemporaries stand on the sidelines amused by our laborious breathing and sluggish moves to the deafening sounds of over-amplified music --- we are wondering whether we will make it to the next judging point. Or better yet: “Perhaps I should just go sit on the Float!” I must admit that I felt considerably better last Saturday and Sunday than I have in the last twelve years. Let me thank all those “well-wishers” who inquired, albeit with a smirk, of the reasons for our absence from the parade. Jeff Carty and I hope and pray to be back next year!

The second difference for me was the Calypso Monarch Competition. Every year I take up my position, amidst a group of friends, at the back fence, under the commentary booths, to witness the performance. We listen to every single Calypsonian, only taking a break for refreshment between rounds. When I was a Member of the ECCB Monetary Council, the organizers had to arrange a Charter to get me back to Anguilla in time for the show, having been told, in no uncertain terms, that such would be the only condition under which I would be prepared to attend. My presence was not mandatory, but was required for purposes of a quorum, since other members were also unable to attend for other reasons. The point I am making is that the Calypso Monarch Competition is my favourite traditional Carnival event and whether they sing about me, sing around me or sing on me --- I will be “in the house” and attentive. I have been asked how am I able to be un-moved by the sometimes unkind things that are said. My answer is quite simple: “That’s Calypso!”

Don’t get me wrong! It is not fair for any Calypsonian to use the art form to slander citizens. But as politicians and public figures --- we expect them to express their opinions in an entertaining manner on issues they strongly believe in. At the end of the day it is their opinion and not necessarily true or accurate. In many cases the lyrics are presented in a comedic form and should be accepted for what they are --- entertainment. Calypsonians often repeat things that they would have heard on political platforms and other forums, and are usually careful to place them in that context, namely, something they heard. Traditionally, calypsonians have been informally granted what is considered “poetic licence” thereby allowing them to use certain language and terminology as an aspect of the art form rather than having to conform to the burden of proof or evidence in the lyrics they compose. In fact, the culture expects exaggeration, extrapolation and a play on words and ideas as an aspect of the presentation. To put it simply, a person of our Caribbean culture should know when a Calypsonian is to be taken seriously --- and those who are inclined to file cases against them for libel or slander must also appreciate the fact that our judicial system is also fully aware of the boundaries, which circumscribe the art form.

There is also the other factor, that is, reaction. The person who is being sung about must decide how best to react. If a Calypsonian decides to “flatter” you by making you the subject of his composition you must decide whether it is best to complain and whine or just take it in stride. In most cases reacting negatively or going so far as engaging a lawyer brings more positive attention to the calypso and the Calypsonian than would otherwise be the case. In fact, the audience and the culture know when the Calypsonian has gone too far. They will take it in its context. And he or she will have to face up to the public outcry, which can also damage their reputation as artistes. Calypsonians get credit for their sense of balance and the quality of the product they present just like any other artiste. It is a two way street! It is a Monarch who wears the crown --- not a knave!

You must be asking why I have taken such a long and scenic road to explain the second difference for me this year. Why have I waxed so philosophical about libel and slander in the calypso art form? No! It is not about Porkyman’s Legal Licence! It is really about the fact that I have taken “my blows” every year during the Calypso Competition with a sense of both understanding and amusement. But for the most part I was spared this year. The heat was on the Government and its incompetence; the veteran and his departure; the wrong budget; the blame game; a host of other comments relating to the deception of the last election; and so on. What a difference a year makes in the topics that reach the Calypso media! In any case, I was just as happy to hear the renditions this year as last year. Calypso for me is about lyrics, tune, melody and delivery. Not whether the Calypsonian is kind or unkind to me. I believe that this year’s competition was of a high standard and we were all winners both on stage and in the audience. I have heard that members and supporters of the Government have not been so gracious in their comments.

I must congratulate the participants for the tremendous effort and talents they brought to the stage and the airwaves. The opportunity to be showcased in this manner highlights the multi-faceted importance of the Summer Festival for bringing out a variety of talent and enterprise from among our people. It was, not only, the artistes, the pageant contestants and the bands --- it was also the groups responsible for the productions and those responsible for capturing them electronically for audio and video broadcast and posterity. All homegrown! The beginnings of new careers and business opportunities in a shrinking world! That can carry them beyond the sandy white coasts and craggy limestone cliffs, which encircle our island home. I would recommend to those who missed any of the events to tune in to the local television channels to see them in good quality video productions.

But last week the world did not stand still. A number of us lost loved ones in the midst of our anticipation and celebration. While I commiserate with the families of all who are left to mourn it would be “unnatural” for me not to give special mention to the late Mr. Julian Russel Harrigan, not particularly for his role as a public servant at the most senior levels of Government, but moreso, as a consequence of his contribution to culture throughout his several decades of active involvement in the National Youth Council, Anguilla Choral Circle, and the Mayumba Folklore Group. Julian Harrigan dedicated his many talents and acumen to the promotion of music, youth and cultural expression throughout Anguilla and the longevity of Mayumba is a testimony to his efforts. He has left a legacy, which must be emulated if this component of our culture is to be cultivated and preserved for future generations of Anguillians. May his soul rest in peace.

Major occurrences in other parts of the world also impacted us last week while we were in a festive mood. The credit rating of the United States of America the most powerful nation on earth was downgraded from “AAA” to “AA+”. Because we are so susceptible to the vagaries of the international economy, particularly the United States, we can expect some fall out. It can mean that for our Government, the provision of products and services in the industries we participate will become more competitive and it may be equally challenging to attract foreign direct investment to critical sectors of our economy.

But there was also some good news at home which may have been lost amidst our preoccupation with the celebrations. The sale of Viceroy could probably result in as much as a fifty million EC Dollar windfall for the Government of Anguilla. This could be a great opportunity for the Government to turn things around while we wait for the rest of the world. Hopefully, it will also be an occasion for the Chief Minister to understand and appreciate the importance of partnering with local and foreign investors at this time, in an atmosphere or mutual respect. The only downside, which still remains in this situation, is how the several buyers will be treated and how that treatment will affect our future investment climate.

While I sat and pondered over the past week, the entertainment, the reveling, the calypsos, the sadness, the state of the world, the good news at home, and even the future --- Herman Wouk’s famous novel “Don’t Stop The Carnival” came to mind. I decided that it is time to read it again. I recall that it is a novel about experiences on a fictitious West Indian island and the attitude that affords survival even amidst the challenges of island living. It is really not about carnival. But I want to share a small excerpt with you which may suggest why we should never do away with our Summer Festival: “The West Indian is not exactly hostile to change, but he is not much inclined to believe in it. This comes from a piece of wisdom that his climate of eternal summer teaches him. It is that, under all the parade of human effort and noise, today is like yesterday, and tomorrow is like today; that existence is a wheel of recurring patterns from which no one escapes; that all anybody does in life is live for a while and then die for good, without finding out much; and that therefore the idea is to take things easy and enjoy the passing time under the sun. The white people charging hopefully around the islands these days in the noon glare, making deals, bulldozing airstrips, hammering up hotels, laying out marinas, opening banks, night clubs, and gift shops, are to him a passing plague. They have come and gone before.”

Need I say more! Don’t stop the Carnival!

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
August 10, 2011