"FACE THE FACTS!"

Mr. Statchel Fritz Warner - 1989 Anguilla National Alliance
(ANA) candidate for District 6, Road South, Anguilla

Constitutional reform was started by the AUF and it failed because the AUF was not interested. The AUF saying that the issue should be taken to the people and if the people vote yes, then set a time table is understandable because it fits into their stall, do nothing, maintain the status quo platform. If the AUF during its ten years in office had even once mentioned independence even by 2050 and said these are the steps needed it would have some crediblity on the issue. The AUF has done nothing visible to push the British toward Constitutional reform although it portrays itself is the British favoured children. The AUF from all accounts is happy being British.

AUM has taken on the issue of constitutional reform because it fits perfectly into its anti British rethoric. This constant fighting with the British is not to the benefit of Anguilla but serves as a distraction from other issues. Hubert is just interested in the politics of independence not in the fact that its a serious journey for the people of Anguilla. The belief that all problems will be solved once we get rid of the British is seriously flawed.

Anguilla continue to mix religion and politics and its a receipe for disaster. If the preachers and former preachers who are so actively involved in the political future of Anguilla really believe what they have been preaching over the years, they should step aside and wait for Jesus to bring his constitution. They would also know that the world will end before independence is granted, therefore they should just stop confusing the people. The future belongs to those of us who will be around after the preachers world ends.

It is sad to see the Government of Anguilla fighting with the British when there are other more urgent issues, rather than fighting with the British we should be using them to accomplish our goals, the way they used our ancestors to accomplish their goals and built their economy. We appear to genuinely lack an understanding of how the British empire works even after 45 year of invasion. The British are not as smart or evil as we gave them credit for. They are just another group of Europeans worried about their existence, just another failing economy.

In the final analysis independence will depend on the calibre of the politicians and the mentality of the people. In this regard based on stated positions and present behaviour of both leaders of the AUM and AUF, they will both best served the people of Anguilla as colonial underdogs. I would hate to see either of them as the leaders of an independent Anguilla, thankfully fate is only the side of the people of Anguilla......

By: Statchel Warner

“KUNTA KINTE COME FORWARD!”

Let me take this opportunity to congratulate the First Baptist Church on its celebration of fifty years of Baptist Ministry on Anguilla. Many persons from my generation and before will remember the early years of Pastor Freeman Goodge’s Ministry on Anguilla. In those early days very few people referred to that Church as the “Baptist Church” but rather as “Goodge’s Church”. From those very humble beginnings in 1962 a number of Anguillians started their journey in the Christian faith and many of them have become pillars of the Baptist Ministry in all parts of the Caribbean and indeed the world. Probably one of the earliest followers, Pastor Cecil Richardson, gave a brief history of the Baptist Ministry on Anguilla to include the period during the Anguilla Revolution when it may have even been considered the spiritual and moral conscience of the movement.

It was also a pleasure to see one of the late Pastor Goodge’s sons, Pastor Gary Goodge bringing the first message but it was another product of the Goodge’s Ministry, Pastor Beltane Harrigan who brought the main message of the celebration with great animation to a very receptive congregation. The general focus of the entire celebration was on the next fifty years and the overwhelming importance of the Church in making a positive difference in Anguilla. All in all it was a very captivating worship experience and I commend Pastor Norril Gumbs on the leadership role he played in putting the event together.

My reflections after the service was on the manner in which Governments use the Church as a convenient institution to legitimize themselves and as a scapegoat at times for the problems in the wider community. When things get out of hand they complain that the Church is not taking up its responsibility and when things are good they seldom think about the important support the Church provides as a source of strength and stability in the community. There are even those persons who use the Church as a platform to launch their political ambitions --- and putting on the mantle of self-righteousness they portray themselves as bastions of integrity in our society. In the last election for example, one “man of the cloth” used his position in the Church as a means of winning support by evoking God’s condemnation on those who voted against his party. It was a most blasphemous act by a man who I had highly respected for his exceptional ability to deliver God’s Word. But in a way it illustrates the powerful impact of the Church in our communities as well as the importance of the Word rather than the Preacher to the challenges we face as an island state.

Don’t get me wrong! I fully support the doctrine which seemed to be the focus of the 50th Anniversary Celebration, namely, that the Church is that “unstoppable group” that must ensure that our nation is on the right course. However, it (the Church) should not be manipulated to advance the personal interests of unscrupulous individuals. It is always amuses me when the Chief Minister calls upon the Christian Council and the Evangelical Association whenever he is in some kind of trouble or wants to advance some aspect of his political agenda. However, he is also very quick to attack particular members of those bodies when they oppose any aspect of his style, approach, attitude or decisions.

The foregoing pattern of behaviour is also true of the Chief Minister’s supporters and advisors. They continue to pretend that they espouse lofty ideals and Christian principles in scorn of their opponents --- who they relegate to the category of subservient “house slaves”; cowardly lackey’s of the oppressors; and “alleged” criminals. Just because their opponents do not accept the style, approach, attitude and decisions of their Government. Mrs. Josephine Gumbs-Connor felt it necessary to unleash a searing attack on the Anguilla United Front (AUF) because of its decision that, based on the course the Constitutional and Electoral Reform Committee was taking, its (AUF) members were disassociating themselves from the process, going forward. The AUF made its reasons very clear and its letter concluded with a carefully thought-out position:

“It is therefore clear to us that, inasmuch as full internal self-government is no longer an option at this point in time, there are two (2) other real options available to Anguilla and Anguillians,(i) enhancing/improving our existing relationship with the UK as a British Overseas Territory; or (ii) deciding on the issue of independence.

The AUF is therefore of the view that the course of action which the Government of Anguilla has embarked upon in relation to full internal self-government is ineffective and time consuming. We would suggest that the constitutional reform instead focus on the viability of options (i) and (ii) as aforementioned.

If, after appropriate consultation and education on the pros and cons of independence, our people decide to vote yes for independence, then the AUF will join with the Government of Anguilla in agreeing a timetable for independence and lend its full support to the educational process. For the record, however, it should be known that while we call for a referendum in order to ascertain the views of the people, the AUF does not support independence for Anguilla at this time but we are in full support of a well thought through educational process on the pros and cons of independence.”

It is this difference of opinion that caused Mrs. Gumbs-Connor to embark on that “subjective rant” and to which Mr. Marcel Fahie referred in his article in the Anguillian entitled: “Vitriol Unbecoming Of A Black Anguillian Empress”. I was grateful for Mr. Fahie’s analysis of her reaction --- a reaction that for a moment stunned me to the extent that I felt compelled to reread the AUF letter several times to ensure that no one had tampered with its contents before publication. And I particularly liked Mr. Fahie’s comment on Ms. Gumbs-Connor’s conduct when he wrote: “I also thought of the forceful and virulent reaction, of the extreme intolerance, shown by Mrs. Gumbs-Connor towards the AUF’s point of view set out in its letter to Rev. Dr. Niles. She should know that such hostility, attempted psychological black mail and bullying, if not resisted, create the environment from which dictatorship springs. Thanks to the voices of moderation and tolerance, extremes were avoided in the Anguilla Revolution. Reason tempered rashness in the early days and helped us to arrive at the place we find ourselves in today.” Because as Mr. Fahie concluded the AUF was only suggesting an “open and responsible discourse on our path to constitutional advancement and the attainment of greater self-determination.” It neither mentioned nor did it imply an attitude of subservience it simply recommended a “good governance” approach to the process.

In vindication of our position, the Chief Minister during and after his CARICOM meeting, made a number of statements in the regional and international media that clearly show that the Constitutional exercise is simply a tool to manipulate Anguillians into believing that independence is our only option.

In the Anguillian he is reported to have said: “Government is now undertaking a constitutional exercise to achieve full internal self-government --- if this is fails, he (Hughes) will pursue independence.”

In a release from Suriname he said: “the Governor of Anguilla is a virtual dictator and he manipulates every system to suit his whims and fancies.”

In the Amsterdam News in New York City he is quoted as having said: “Britain has made it clear that it has no plans to grant greater executive autonomy, like self-governance, to the island --- much less full independence, as some islanders seem to want --- because ‘they believe that we have an abundance of oil, gas and fish life. They have deemed Anguilla now to be a valuable asset that should not be let go of.”

Obviously the Chief Minister is painting a picture locally, regionally and internationally that Anguilla has no choice but to go into independence because the British have refused to give us full internal self-government; because the Governor is an evil dictator who is enslaving the people of Anguilla; and that Anguilla has to fight for Independence because the British wants to grab our oil, gas and fish resources for themselves. The totality of which are lies and half-truths that creates a false premise for rushing into independence. All of the above reinforces the concerns that the AUF expressed in its letter that we are being taken for a ride in the constitutional exercise.

But I would like Mrs. Josephine Gumbs-Connor to react as promptly and with similar indignation to a letter from the Members of the Constitutional and Electoral Reform Committee to the same Chairman (Rev. Dr. Niles) to whom our letter was addressed. The letter is captioned: “Procedural Impropriety of the Chairman of the Anguilla Constitutional and Electoral Reform Committee”, and reads in part as follows:

“ A constitution, apparently coming from this Committee, has been released to the public without the approval of the Committee and without the knowledge and approval of the Chief Minister. This document cannot be retracted and has caused unnecessary confusion and embarrassment to the Committee. Your conduct amounts to procedural impropriety and has brought the reputation of the Committee into disrepute. The result of your behaviour is that the Committee members wish to distance ourselves from the document you produced to the public.

On March 07, 2012 the Committee met and decided that you have lost the confidence of the Committee and requests that you immediately recuse yourself as Chairman of the Committee. The Committee does not wish for you to take any further role in its proceedings. We demand that you present your resignation letter within 48 hours from the date of this letter. We also demand that you refrain from any contact with the public regarding the duties of this Committee.”

This letter was signed by all the Members of the Committee, namely, Mr. Whaldama “Ras Bee” Brooks; Mr. John Benjamin; Mr. Patrick “Sheriff” Hanley; Ms. Dawne Richardson; Mr. Brent Davis; and Ms. Quincia Gumbs.

I would beg readers to note that the document to which the Committee is referring is the same document that caused the AUF to recall its representative on the Committee. You will likewise note that a similar phrase to wit, “distance ourselves”, is being used. We used the phrase “disassociate ourselves”.

I am not getting into the question of who is right or wrong in the present dispute between the Committee and its Chairman --- but what I am saying is that the AUF representative on the Committee, Mrs. Cora Richardson-Hodge, would also have had good reason to be concerned about the process. One would therefore expect that perhaps either the entire Committee or the Chairman would now be the recipient of the same angry diatribe, to which the AUF was subjected, from Mrs. Josephine Gumbs-Connor. In which regard one could reasonably pose the question: “Which of these two protagonists (the Committee or the Chairman) adequately does justice to the memory of those “Kunta Kinte’s” to whom “Josie” referred?” Will the true Kunta Kinte come forward!

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, writer and author of a weekly political article for The Anguillian News Paper, lyricist, and a self-employed entrepreneur.

“TRY A LITTLE KINDNESS”

Mr. Victor F. Banks

Over the last few days there has been much ceremony and celebration on our island beginning on Friday March 2, 2012 with the birthday of the “father of the nation”, the Hon. James Ronald Webster and the Diamond Jubilee Anniversary of the reign of Queen Elizabeth II. These were two separate events, but both marking significant landmarks in our journey as a people --- the blending of our colonial past with aspirations of nationhood. For a true student of history these are exciting times. Both the Hon. James Ronald Webster and Queen Elizabeth II were born in the same year and less than two months apart. They are obviously from different backgrounds and life experiences but they both feature prominently in the history of our island. Whereas one symbolizes the last vestiges of colonialism --- the other symbolizes the struggle for self- determination and the ultimate goal of full nationhood. 

Fortunately, the difference between our situation today and that of the early freedom fighters for Independence in Africa, India and other parts of the Third World, is that there is no impediment to us achieving nationhood --- if it is the expressed will of the people of Anguilla. That reality should strengthen our resolve to be painstaking in ensuring that we get it right and that we enter that new phase or our political development as a people who are fully aware of our responsibilities through an effective process of education. The politics of fear should not be the prod that goads us on but rather it should be our readiness to take on the responsibilities inherent in the choices we make that must instruct our progress. 

A lot has been said during the period leading up to this weekend of ceremony and celebration over the various media that concerns me. I went out dutifully to celebrate the birthday of the “father of the nation” and was most pleased to hear his statesmanlike presentation and witness his humble demeanour throughout the ceremony. And like many other Anguillians I was most pleased to greet him and get his autograph on my copy of his latest publication. 

My first concern however, stems from the fact that days before the usual Radio Talk Show hosts spent a lot of time involved in the politics of divisionism. Their position seemed to be that only elected persons on the Government side of the House of Assembly had the right to have a celebration on behalf of Mr. Webster’s birthday. Their reason being that the past AUF Government did not support a full holiday for the “father of the nation”. As a consequence they seem to have concluded that it is not a National holiday but rather an AUM holiday for Mr. Webster. 

Whatever the outcome of the difference of opinion on how Mr. Webster’s birthday should be celebrated --- the fact remains that it is a national holiday that is embraced by all Anguillians and as such it is to be celebrated by all Anguillians. It is also important to mention that it was never the view that Mr. Webster’s birthday should not be celebrated. It was always a matter of how to capture the essence of his contribution in a manner that was most educational and inspirational especially to the young people of this island, who as the Hon. Evans McNiel Rogers pointed out in his address, have grandparents born in Anguilla who have no first hand recollection of that period of our history. Mr. Rogers also reemphasized the point that: “It (Mr. Webster’s Birthday) should not be just another day or weekend to go shopping in St Maarten. Should it ever become such --- we would have done a great disservice to your (Mr. Webster’s) legacy and that of the other stalwarts who were a part of that early band of “pioneers.” I believe that this statement is central to the controversy of how Mr. Webster’s Birthday should be celebrated. And rather than ignore the proverbial “800 pound gorilla in the room” let us be mindful of the several shades of opinion about leadership in the Revolutionary period that we must acknowledge rather than alienate. 

Such controversies about holidays for national leaders are not uncommon, neither are they intended to be disrespectful of those leaders in question. In fact, the ongoing controversy in several States in the U.S. A. over the holiday for their “father of the nation”, George Washington, was eventually resolved by renaming it “Presidents Day”, where not only George Washington but other Presidents and the office of the Presidency could be honored. Indeed the purpose of such days is to unify the nation rather than to divide it. The Chief Minister’s quip at the conclusion of his address about “not going to Sandy Ground” may therefore be considered especially divisive. The event at Sandy Ground put on by the AUF Road North Constituency Cell for Mr. Webster’s Birthday was just another venue of celebration. And I am sure that as the years go by there will be many other such ideas. 

My second concern is with regards to the visit of Prince Edward and the statements made by a number of Talk Show Hosts and AUM supporters, as if to encourage civil disobedience and protest during that visit. It seemed as if many of these personalities have bought wholesale into the position advanced by the Chief Minister that we are in “an undeclared war” with the British Government. In the circumstances, one Talk Show Host went so far as to question the fact that a number of persons turned up in their Sunday best to worship with Prince Edward at St. Mary’s. A statement also went out on the airwaves that parents should not allow their children to take part in the parade. The point I am making is, that there is no need for incivility and discourteous behaviour in a situation where it serves no useful purpose for advancing the interests of the community --- and especially at a time when we should be teaching our youngsters to use less confrontational methods to deal with the conflicts in their lives and their relationships. 

Speaking of youngsters, the eve of the Birthday of the “father of the nation” was no deterrent to the murderous intentions of our youngsters who seem to have again embarked on a vicious cycle of gun/gang violence. Yet another time over the past months young men have fallen victim to deliberate and senseless shootings. As a community we should be asking the question what is the root cause of this problem? I believe that there is no singular reason for this rash of gun-violence and it therefore requires a multifaceted approach to developing a solution or group of solutions to contain and eradicate it. The lack of capacity by the Police Force to crack these cases in a timely manner contributes to a feeling of insecurity in the community as a whole but also emboldens these perpetrators to carry out their vicious acts without the fear of being caught and very often in the presence of witnesses. 

For an island which once used the marketing slogan: “tranquility wrapped in blue” we can no longer boast about being a “low crime” or “no crime” destination. There was a time when one of our flagship hotels boasted that it had no room keys --- today that is a real risk. While our tourism plant still remains relatively safe there are no guarantees that the present situation now in isolated parts of the community will not eventually spill over into other venues if left unchecked. The silence about these incidents in the various communities is sometimes rationalized by the view that if we talk publicly about it and it hits the international media --- it will destroy our tourism industry. While this may have some short-term merit --- the truth is that if we do not confront the problem and deal with it effectively our tourism product will be destroyed in the longer term anyway. 

But while the situation can impact the Tourism sector the impact on the society can be even more devastating. The victims of these senseless acts bring tremendous pain, suffering, financial strain and in the extreme circumstances grief to their families. The business sector, particularly the local entrepreneurs lose considerable income as their clientele begin to cut back on their social life and frequent other places usually owned by expatriate interests. Already a number of normally law-abiding citizens are considering the acquisition of firearms in most cases, because of police restrictions, illegally. The proliferation of guns can possibly lead to a very dangerous and volatile situation in the community. There is need for all out campaign against these conditions across the political spectrum. 

In this context, I have used this medium to highlight the dangers of this situation and appeal to the Government and the wider community to join us in this effort. It calls for resources, and committed persons to advance this cause --- but first of all we need a plan. Our party has begun the groundwork for such a document that can be used as a working paper for further discussions with the community and the Royal Anguilla Police Force. The Police Force cannot succeed in their efforts without community support --- it is an integral part of the investigatory process and we must formulate our plan around their expertise and resources. If our efforts do nothing more than boost awareness in the community of the nature of gang/gun violence it is my belief that we would have created a significant civilian watch group to assist the policing and investigatory process. 

But let us not speak about our young people involved in these incidents as if they are from another planet. They are our children, our brothers, our cousins, our nephews and our friends. They have been socialized in our systems with the tutelage of their parents, teachers and peers. Anything they have become is because somewhere in that chain of tutelage we may have dropped the ball in some way. They did not make themselves. So we all must take some responsibility. We share in the pain and grief of all those parents and siblings who have seen their loved ones maimed and murdered. And we empathize even with those of you whose offspring lie incarcerated in the prison system. Are they remorseful? Have they changed their lives? Will they ever become productive citizens again? 

And even as we speak of Colonialism, Independence, House Slaves, Field Slaves, Kunta Kinte, Massa, the Select Few, the Masses and Classes let take some time to show love and caring to the marginalized, the poor, the depressed, the abused and the angry in our society. It is time to try a little kindness even for our “brother standing down the road with a heavy load from the seeds he sowed!”

By: Victor F. Banks

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

“I REST MY CASE”

Mr. Victor F. Banks

On Friday, March 2nd, we will be officially celebrating the Birthday of the Hon. James Ronald Webster, the Father of the Nation. It is an event now in its third year and one which gives Anguillians an opportunity to pay homage to the great contribution that Mr. Webster made as the most central figure of our Revolution in 1967. While there may be several shades of opinion regarding the Revolution --- no one can dispute the fact that he was the most prominent figure in that effort and is the Leader who commanded the widest popular support during that period. 

It was because of his strong determination and unwavering resolve to free Anguilla from the shackles of the hostile Central Government led by Premier Robert L. Bradshaw at all costs, that Mr. Webster attracted the respect of his colleagues and most Anguillians. Undoubtedly, his brand of leadership was exactly what Anguilla needed at that juncture in our political history. Let me take the opportunity in my column to wish the Hon. James Ronald Webster a wonderful day and pray for continued blessings for many years to come. Happy Birthday Mr. Webster! 

I think that it is appropriate to use this time of celebration for reflection as well. And I will lift two excerpts from Mr. Webster’s Message in the 40th Anniversary Commemorative Magazine to introduce my short reflection. Mr. Webster wrote: “Since May 30th, 1967, Anguilla has undergone a fundamental reconstruction. Despite our ups and downs we were able to cope with the many adverse situations. Our respective Governments have made it possible for every young Anguillian to receive a quality education and maintain a brighter hope for tomorrow as the island moves forward.” It is obvious from this statement that Mr. Webster seemed satisfied in 2007 that our young people, the focus of the “ brand new Anguilla” that he and the other early pioneers set out to build, was on track. He confirms that fact in another statement along with an admonition. He wrote: “As we reflect on this milestone of 40 years, we can rejoice in the fact that we are living in a peaceful island and one of much charm and beauty. We must continue to build and strengthen our nation through love and loyalty and to share these great virtues with each other.” 

If I were to begin with the second quotation from Mr. Webster’s Message a number of issues come to mind. Among them the spate of senseless shootings and robberies that haunt this our “peaceful island” and to which he (Mr. Webster) so proudly referred. A number of victims are now suffering various forms of impairment: lower body paralysis; damaged organs; crippled limbs and other lasting injuries, both physical and mental. The victims are both young and old. Hardworking Anguillians who find themselves stricken at the hands of young perpetrators who would seek to deprive them of their honest earnings. And young men with bright prospects who must now face the future with challenging handicaps. These victims and their families cannot “rejoice in the fact that we are living in a peaceful island” 

Mr. Webster’s admonition included in the same quotation was that: “we must continue to build and strengthen our nation through love and loyalty and to share these great virtues with each other”. But when we try to make sense out of these incidents of violence we are left to question where that love has gone. And further to ask what has happened to us as a people, when the very children whose future Mr. Webster and the leaders of the revolutionary period fought to secure are maiming and killing each other for no apparent reason. 

Our prisons are now overcrowded with young men who have made violence a way of life, oblivious to the dreams of their grandparents in 1967 of a “nation proud strong and free” --- and of a heritage preserved for them by honest work and sacrifice. It is obvious that a great amount of anger consumes our young men. What else could possess them to commit such senseless act of violence against each other and other innocent people in the community? What can we do to advance the building and strengthening of our nation “through love and loyalty” --- and save our young men? These are real questions, which must occupy our thoughts even as we celebrate the Birthday of the Father of our Nation. A nation that once brandished guns to secure peace and freedom --- now finds its peace and freedom threatened by guns in the hands of young men with no regard whatsoever for the consequences of their actions. 

The image of young Anguillians standing around listening to the comments and rebellious talk of adults congregating at an action spot during the Revolution brings back memories of the uncertainty of that period. It was, however, exciting for such youngsters for whom the whole affair was just another thrilling experience --- and more often than not, the opportunity to stay home from school. 

In this context, it was both nostalgic and inspirational to view a silent documentary of “Operation Sheepskin” --- “The Invasion of Anguilla” filmed in March 1969 by a videographer from the British team. I am grateful to one of my friends for sending me the link. And I encourage everyone who wants to get a sense of the passion and resolve of our people at that time, to linkup and view the film. 

I recognized many faces, forty-three years younger of course, including the likes of Bishop Errol Brooks, the late “Miss Joseph”, the late“John T”, Leslie E. Richardson, Pastor Davis Lloyd and many more persons among the throng of Anguillians who had come to the Court House to see for themselves what “these invaders” had in mind. It was serious business, smiles were rare, and the crowd of Anguillians were very much engaged and animated. 

Despite the lack of sound one can feel the emotion coming from the screen as the video rolls. And standing there, some very young bystanders, boys for the most part, completely absorbed in the proceedings; perhaps not even realizing that they were witnessing a bit of history in the making and the possibility of a brighter future for them. 

Of course, Mr. Webster was there in youthful vigor --- sometimes with the Bible in one hand and at other times with the Anguilla Flag. It is the picture of a Leader standing side by side with his people exuding confidence and hope. The whole film a compendium of images causing tears to “well-up” as one observes the unpretentious looks on the faces of Anguillians in their uncertainty with the outcome of this entire affair. It is a touching image and one which every child, student and adult should see. It would be a good thing to show this film to the “angry young men” that may even now be inspired by the positive images, which this documentary conjures up. 

Mr. Webster in the first quotation wrote: “Since May 30th, 1967, Anguilla has undergone a fundamental reconstruction. Despite our ups and downs we were able to cope with the many adverse situations. Our respective Governments have made it possible for every young Anguillian to receive a quality education and maintain a brighter hope for tomorrow as the island moves forward.” This statement of positive progress on the 40th Anniversary of the Anguilla Revolution contained in the Chief Minister’s Message is refreshing given our disappointment with some of our young men. But all is not lost! I believe that the recent Leeward Islands Debating Competition (LIDC) demonstrated the positive outcome of those opportunities that Mr. Webster spoke about in his Message. The Anguilla Debating Team “showed its stuff” in the 40th Anniversary of the LIDC, winning the Competition decisively against some very formidable Opponents from St Maarten, Montserrat and Antigua. 

At a time when our thoughts are occupied with the number of shootings in our island attributed to young men --- there is a tendency to put a negative label on the Youth as a body. In this context, many Anguillians have expressed great pride in the performance of our debating team. From the beginning to the end the debaters brought out the best of Anguilla and gave us all a reason to feel that our efforts have been put to good use and that the future of Anguilla is secured as these students make their way through tertiary education to positions of authority and prominence in our communities. But I believe that it goes even further because not only the Anguilla team but all the other teams and their supporters as well, have exhibited the highest level of decorum in their approach and professionalism in their presentations. In this sense it also augurs well for our region as a whole. 

There is no doubt that the Anguilla Debating Club is a “center of excellence” at the Albena Lake-Hodge Comprehensive School. A number of professionals in several fields of endeavour have come through the Club and are today either well settled in their careers or are still in the process of training. Kudos must go out to the many teachers, coaches and resources persons over the years that have worked diligently with them --- it goes to show that it is evolving into a community effort. But to the gladiators themselves who went to battle for their school and country belong the highest commendations. So, “big up!” to Deanna; Zipporah; Dayna; Mikeela, Senegal; and Jose’ you all made us proud! 

So as we reflect this week on the vision of the Father of the Nation on the occasion of his birthday, let us not be discouraged by the setbacks we now face --- there is still a lot of work to be done. We must stem the tide of violence in our communities with positive messages. Let us take Mr. Webster’s admonition to strengthen our nation through “love and loyalty” rather than “anger and hate” which seems to abound. 

The incivility that has become a feature of our behaviour at many levels cannot be helpful to this cause. We need to return to the tradition of mutual respect and civility that has characterized us as a people. Wherever we have traveled throughout the world to make an honest living we have demonstrated these qualities. Why should we be any less courteous and respectful at home? According to our victorious debating team: “I rest my case!”

By: Victor F. Banks

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