“WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND!”

The last two weeks have been fraught with examples of the incompetence of this Government and its supporters in dealing with the normal issues in the management of its affairs. One gets the distinct impression that, to put it colloquially, “dey don’t know wah dey doin.” For example, in my last column I spoke at length about the Parliamentary Secretary’s “boo-boo” in trying to make politics out of an issue that required non-partisan support as well as an understanding of proper protocol; last week the national holiday to celebrate the “father of the nation” was also undermined by a blatant disregard for protocol and this week the House of Assembly has been postponed supposedly to have public consultations on the implementation of the “interim” Stabilization Levy. A levy that is critical to the passing of the budget and is intended to be implemented in little over three weeks.

While I applaud the Ministry of Finance for the latter initiative --- I seriously doubt that any serious consultations can take place at this eleventh hour. As I recall the Leader of the Opposition raised a number of important questions on this matter during the budget debates not the least among which were the questions: a) How will this revenue be utilized? b) Will it be placed in the Consolidated Fund to be spent in any manner the Government wishes or will it be used for special purposes? c) Will this levy eventually become the National Health Fund Levy? d) How “interim” is “interim”, that is, how long will this levy be in place in its proposed form? e) How will it be implemented and collected equitably in cases where persons are self-employed? It is my understanding that during the presentation of the budget proposal agreement reached between Government and the FCO consultants a few weeks ago --- a few brief comments and questions of similar content were raised by some of the participants. However, in the real sense of the process of consultations, most of these queries were not adequately addressed. My question therefore is will this meeting on Tuesday, March 8th, 2011 suffice to clarify these concerns?

Discerning readers of my column would have noticed that I have deliberately avoided going into detail about the tax measures imposed by the present AUM government over the past twelve months. First of all, this is a Government that during the recent election campaign spouted considerable rhetoric about taxation and borrowing and placed all blame for Anguilla’s financial and economic plight on the “willful errors” of the past Government with the complicity of the British Government. I use the term “willful” because during the same campaign the “serial liars” of the AUM party “fabricated” a number of conspiracy theories in an effort to win the election. In fact, the Parliamentary Secretary from his infamous “black book” in “mock” investigatory style revealed what he claimed to be “already agreed taxation measures” set to be implemented immediately in the event that the Anguilla United Front should win the election. He also mentioned that there was a British Frigate in Sandy Ground waiting to ensure that such measures took place. It is little wonder then that a number of Anguillians out of genuine concern for the future took these “serial liars” at their word and voted to prevent the realization of their fearsome predictions.

Even after the AUM won the election they continued to spread this conspiracy to consolidate and legitimize their victory. On March 31, 2010, the Chief Minister in an address to the nation on his return from his talks in London said: “The Memoranda of Agreement in particular which the AUF signed in secret with the full knowledge of the Governor in Executive Council, has squandered Anguilla’s prime tourism beach resources to foreign land speculators, who among other things are allowed to invest in real estate, while giving away the taxes that were needed to propel the economy, meet the cost of financing social services, the cost of paying your civil servants and of maintaining Law and Order.” It is both ironic and unfortunate that even the beach resources that the Chief Minister spoke about and which the past Government sought to secure for the enjoyment of Anguillians at the Cap Juluca were given away in the naïve negotiations with officials of his own Government. In fact, if one were to consider the benefits that the people of Anguilla have lost in terms of the local management and the size and of the National Park; the exploitation of near-shore beach resources; the restrictions on areas for built-development, and; the options for local ownership in Cap Juluca --- one would tend to agree with Mr. Ashton Bradley’s conclusion that rather than changing the Cap Juluca Agreement from an MOA to an MOU they have in fact negotiated an IOU (I[sland] Owe You) rather than an MOU.

Members of the various constituencies in my mind have nothing to be ashamed of because they have been mislead by persons who they considered as trustworthy individuals. The truth is that on the very AUM campaign platform one of their regular speakers was a “man of the cloth” who declared with what appeared to be a “divinely inspired passion” that: “anyone who voted for the Anguilla United Front was in direct confrontation with God and would be punished!” And even now I have also reached the conclusion that a number of the elected officials of the AUM Government including the Elected Member for East End seem to blindly accept many of the lies perpetrated by the main “serial liars” of the AUM party as fact. For example, the APP Elected Member for East End proudly explained the difference between an MOU and an MOA in the House of Assembly as if he was quoting from a legal lexicon compiled by one, “Hubert Hughes, Professor-at-law”. And last evening in the absence of the Chief Minister and his Minister of Home Affairs, I was informed that the Elected Member for Valley South in a “stage managed” interview on an AUM talk show claimed that he learned from Ms. Dorothea Hodge, a political advisor to a former FCO Minister that the past Government and in particular the former Minister of Finance refused aid which was readily available from the British Government to do roads in certain villages in Anguilla. This statement being in concert with a number of lies told on the AUM campaign platform regarding information supposedly received from the same Ms. Dorothea Hodge.

My point is that if the inexperienced AUM elected officials can be misled by the “serial liars” of their own party --- it is quite conceivable that the wider electorate can also be fooled. In the case of the Elected Member for Valley South, it would be most unfortunate if he does not know that since March 2003, the Anguillian Government has not received any capital aid from the British Government. The terminology used is that we have graduated out of the capital aid program. On the other hand, if as he contends he was so informed by Ms. Hodge he either misunderstood what she said or Ms. Hodge may have misspoken on that issue. In either case it proves that it is very easy to find oneself trusting statements made by persons whom we have no reason to mistrust or who are deliberately trying to exploit that trust by deliberately trying to mislead us. Unfortunately, the dilemma of many persons during the last election campaign falls in either one or both of these categories.

I made the statement very often during the election campaign, having had the premonition that the AUM “serial liars” were exploiting the frustrations of the electorate sufficiently and could conceivably steal the election, that “ the AUM can fly an election campaign but cannot land a Government!” My statement was based on the unrealistic promises and outright lies that were being employed to achieve their objectives. Mr. Patrick Hanley, popularly known as “Sheriff” in a short posting on his “Facebook page” on June 17, 2010 made the following comment: “the past government operated on a policy of putting more money in the economy than it takes out by taxation, with the expectation that increased business activity will bring enough additional revenue to cover the shortfall, this policy has now proven to have failed, as we are now seeing record deficits with no short term resolution”.

The ongoing talk by the Chief Minister about “deficit financing” was a terminology that he (the CM) used as a flawed description of normal budgetary arrangements in all the Overseas Territories. As past Minister of Finance, I have never taken an unbalanced recurrent estimates budget to the House of Assembly. The first unbalanced budgets brought to the House of Assembly since 1983 were the budgets that this present Chief Minister and Minister of Finance brought to the House in April 2010, June 2010 and December 2010. Having said that, the impact of the global financial recession on our economy determined that such a solution was necessary but it also required negotiations with our partners in the private sector and the FCO in an atmosphere of mutual respect and cooperation. In fact, Mr. Hanley’s final admonition in his closing sentences rings true: “parties must lay aside their differences and work for the common good. More can be done and done more quickly, if everyone is on the same page instead of posturing for party advantage.”

But the point I wish to make about Mr. Hanley’s statement is that it is based on a false premise established by misinformation constantly being promulgated by the Chief Minister. Never in any of my presentations, neither formally nor informally, have I used the term “deficit financing”. To further substantiate this misinformation the Parliamentary Secretary, in a comment on the same posting made wrote: “the former Minister of Finance has long preached the values of deficit financing”. In the Ministries of Finance under my stewardship various components of capital expenditure were financed either by grants or borrowing. However, in the case of borrowing for capital development the repayment was always included in the recurrent estimates as part of recurrent expenditure. These arrangements do not fit the textbook definition of “deficit financing” from which Mr. Hanley quotes in response to a direct question from Mr. Fritz Smith on the same posting. Nor does it describe what has been happening in Anguilla over the past ten years. Estimates are what they are --- estimates! Given the vulnerability of the Anguillan economy to natural and external shocks such estimates are even less scientific and therefore allows any “pundit of economics” to come up with some theoretical framework to fit his/her arguments. These are the kinds of statements by the AUM party that take root and are spread about as factual by unwitting supporters and very often become the launching point for even more dangerous inaccuracies and lies.

All of the foregoing brings us to a very important point. Last week in my column I referred to the entire budgetary saga as “much ado about nothing!” But in truth and in fact the whole process has resulted in considerable costs. In my estimation the only presenter on the Government side of the House who seems to have any real understanding or more accurately, who is unwilling to participate in the conspiracy theories associated with the passage of the budget and the causes of our plight is the Elected Member for Road South, the Hon. Edison Baird. His views are quite unlike Mr. Hanley and others who have been persuaded by the Chief Minister’s lies about “deficit financing”. The nature of the Anguillian economy given the tax regime in place at this time; the paucity of our natural resources and the “openness” of our economy generally, Anguilla can only prosper by growing the economy and maintaining it at an optimal level in a favourable global environment. It is true that we must manage and control our spending and maximize our revenue collection but this cannot succeed without paying due attention to economic development.

The false sense of complacency that the Chief Minister and his colleagues are spreading, by the prior sanction of the budget proposal by FCO, can be dangerous if the electorate believes that we have arrived. First of all, the costs to our economy have increased because we have waited so long bickering about the inevitable, namely, mutual and respectful negotiations with the British Government who must in the end “bail us out” if things get even worse. Secondly, the taxes that they are now imposing far exceed those that the Parliamentary Secretary quoted from his “infamous black book” as representing what the AUF and the FCO were plotting to implement. Thirdly, the Stabilization Levy; the gasoline tax, and the increased customs surcharge will seriously impact the investment sector and jobs. And finally, nothing will happen in this economy if Anguilla continues to be on the “red flag” listing of major private international financial agencies and institutions that have been “scared off” by the thoughtless and damaging rhetoric of the Chief Minister on worldwide media.

Already the Flag Temenos Project negotiations have foundered; the pace of the Solaire Project is not as represented by government; the Cap Juluca Expansion Project is in a holding pattern; there are rumours of political posturing on the proposal for a new project in the Blowing Point area, and; no new investments are appearing at this time in this particular “window of interest” for Anguilla. We are beset by an ever-increasing number of broken promises and incidences of bad governance in this government’s record. And to “top it all off”, supporters of this Government are now fighting among themselves. It was heartrending to hear one of the most vocal callers of the AUM talk show circuit complain that he was driven to tears and his heart ached last Saturday when he heard the position taken by one of their usually supportive talk show personalities. Which only goes to confirm the truth in the saying that: “What goes around [most certainly] comes around!”

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
March 8th, 2011



“ONE MAN”

Farther of the Nation!!!!

There is no better gesture suitable for the honor of James Ronald Webster than having the country stand still for a moment and recognize the leap ahead we’ve made because of “one man.” And no term more suiting as “Father of the nation” The term “one man” is a very sour note to the ears of a significant number of Anguillians because we recall a people of one mind, one determination, one conclusion. We all agree that the name Ronald Webster is most synonymous with the plight of this country and its rise to freedom. We all know, and recognize the personal sacrifice and anguish he suffered, not because of personal loses, lack of sleep or not enough family time as a regular family man. The mission he embraced was one of much more significance than those important chores of life, so he committed himself to the great task ahead, not to sound a warning but win the battle.

It is unclear who actually started the revolution, different accounts are given of different situations and various approaches to accomplishing the stated goal. What we know, as is recorded in the history books that James Ronald Webster was the undisputed leader of the Anguilla’s revolution of 1967. As we know, great minds talk idea, small minds discuss people, and so for our island to attain this success, one man was certainly not enough, he needed everyone else. Those that ran with the mantle and lead this country to victory effectively planned and executed our rise to freedom from literal oppression. We honor everyone with great respect from our hearts and our country says “thanks.” It is a principle from the beginning of time and is recorded in many of the great stories of the Bible age. One man led and one man consequently bears responsibility for leading. Moses led the children to the promise land, it was utterly impossible for this to occur, yet Moses; God’s point man in the wilderness was God’s man with the plan.

Brave and heroic initiatives are taken by conviction not necessarily by conversation. Most certainly, if the plan to liberate Anguilla was discussed and plotted with the masses no matter how honorably, this battle would still be ongoing, because effort was made prior to our time and failed. “Quote from Bless Our Forebears” The story tells of the difficulties Anguilla faced in the years 1840 – 1871 which heightened the resentment of the people to the forced union with St. Kitts. Queen Victoria was petitioned to dissolve the union and administer Anguilla as a British dependency (Direct Rule) Our ground was parched, our housed were raggedy. The book says the principle complaint was “a most galling and oppressive tax regime from St. Kitts; they tax our dogggs and all! We just couldn’t take it no more. The petitioners themselves observed, “That there is no land, so little known or cared for, and none so oppressed than Anguilla. Earlier on the book described the conditions in Anguilla in those days as “fit for little but goats.” Bradshaw and his group of Pin Heads / loony toons, long before his time did not help! Would not help, they never liked us. It was time, some one hundred and three years later; one man knew it was time, by his conviction, by the noble gift of being born on said despicable land mass which we all, as a people were supposed to be herded from to another plantation unknown, we defied the odds and rejected the order and stood with the rock, where even grass wouldn’t grow.

One man was enough to move a nation to act, an act some forty four years now, and excelling to tremendous heights, succeeding in our plight and prospering in our ways. Not even this region can yet understand the Anguillan story of ‘67 and account for what really happened. But obviously, we know! One thing that was way beyond our understanding was how the Lord feels about the liberation of Anguilla. At the honorable age of 85 years, still looking very well, standing strong and still well alert, still cognizant, still able to praise him, without doubt, we can say “God Bless Ronald Webster and God Bless Anguilla!!!!!”

By: eJ.harrisxm

“MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING!”

Let me take this opportunity to congratulate the Albena Lake Hodge Comprehensive School Debating Team for their splendid performance in the British Virgin Islands where they represented Anguilla proudly in this year’s Annual Leeward Islands Debating Competition over the weekend. While they did not bring back the gold --- they were strong finalists and fierce competitors to the very end. Obviously, the debaters did not achieve such excellence on their own --- congratulations are therefore in order for their teachers, parents, teammates, corporate sponsors and supporters as well. It was an all around stellar performance and we cherish their silver medal with a profound sense of patriotism. They deserve our praise both as a team and individually having captured the most best speaker awards.

I felt that the topics were both exciting and challenging and captured some of the more important issues affecting our region. It was indeed inspiring to hear the youth of this sub-region articulate so eloquently, during their presentations, various sides of the issues assigned to them. I felt, as I am sure did many other listeners, a great sense of hope for the future of our island and for the region as a whole. Obviously such events showcase the caliber of professionals and leaders that will secure and protect the heritage that successive generations have sacrificed to build and develop. If the performance of our team in the BVI is any measure of what we can expect as future leaders --- our island will be in good hands indeed. And speaking of legacy and heritage, I am honored to use this column to wish a happy and blessed birthday to the “father of our nation”, the Hon. James Ronald Webster for his outstanding and aptly celebrated contribution to this island we hold most dear. May continued health and happiness attend him for many more years to come.

The Anguilla United Front (AUF) decided to cancel its public meeting on Saturday to allow Anguillians to give our young people their undivided attention during the semi-finals on Saturday. It was therefore most rewarding that they won and went on to the finals the following day. But in the midst of this genuine and commendable gesture of solidarity by the AUF, a notorious “AUM supporter” made a most disappointing statement, characteristically loud and at public gathering place. He shouted that the real reason why the AUF cancelled their meeting was because “the AUM Government got their budget passed and therefore the Opposition (AUF) did not have anything to talk about!”. If that were in fact the case, the Parliamentary Secretary “the circus master” certainly corrected that situation with his usual disregard for procedure and proper governance.

I comment on the matter of the Parliamentary Secretary’s handling of the appointment of a Constitutional and Electoral Committee not only to highlight the matter of the premature issuance of a press release alone but also to demonstrate the continuing use of posturing and lies to make political points and as a consequence waste useful resources and lose valuable gains. For those of you who did not have the opportunity to hear or read the release from the Parliamentary Secretary it does the following things: - 1) Claims that the Chief Minister selected and commissioned a Constitutional and Electoral Reform Committee. 2) Claims that the Chief Minister sent a letter to the new Chair of the Committee. 3) Indicates who is the new Chair of the Committee. 4) Lists a number of persons selected to serve on the Committee. 5) Indicates that the Executive Council would be duly informed and expected to give its blessings.

What the issuance of this release has uncovered are a number of denials from many persons as to the authenticity of the claims in the document as well as the total disregard for proper procedure by the Parliamentary Secretary. Starting with the point number one above, that the Chief Minister selected and commissioned a Committee --- it has been reported that the Chief Minister denies any involvement in the selection of the Committee. Such denials are typical of the Chief Minister --- but if we may refer to the behaviour reported by Minister Baird in “his confessions”, namely, that the Parliamentary Secretary (Parlsec) selected a Board in the CM’s Ministry without consulting him ---it is highly possible that he did not do so on this occasion either.

On the second point the Parlsec claims that the Chief Minister sent a letter to the new Chairman of the Committee and in the third point he names the new Chairman. Both the Chief Minister and the designated new Chairman have been reported to deny any knowledge of any of these claims. First of all, the person in question reportedly said that he was not informed of being made Chairman of any such Committee. However, upon hearing the release he called the Chief Minister who also disavowed granting any authorization for such correspondence to be sent to him.

On the fourth point the Parlsec lists the persons who were selected to serve on the committee. Of the eight persons he claims were selected, five have denied being consulted; three of those have been very vocal in expressing their displeasure; two of which have committed those sentiments to paper.

And on the final point, the Parlsec states in a most indecorous fashion that “the Executive Council will be duly informed” of what, based on the foregoing, seems to be a committee selected by him. Again giving credence to Minster Baird’s statement in his “confessions” that “the Parliamentary Secretary is unashamedly exploiting his familial relationship with the Chief Minister to wield unprecedented levels of power over a range of matters. He started out pretending to be the Chief Minister; he is now pretending to be the Government”.

Some comments from the two “nominees” (for lack of a more appropriate terminology) who put their objections to paper are worthy of mention. The private sector lawyer who responded to the Parlsec’s release makes the following important points: a) her being named as part of the committee was brought to her attention via the media; b) at no time was she asked whether she was willing and able to be a member of the committee; c) that the simple act of consultation shows respect for those whose assistance is sought and creates a climate of goodwill and cooperation.

The public service lawyer makes equally important points regarding the nature of the release in particularly in the context of proper procedures in governance. She points out that:- i) to say that the Executive Council will be duly informed is alarming given the gravity of Constitutional and Electoral Reform; ii) the Executive Council first authorizes and then must give final approval for the process before any committee or commission on Constitutional reform can be launched; iii) a public servant should not be a part of any committee where the proper procedures have not been followed; and iv) the process the Parlsec followed “sets the cart before the horse” and does not represent good governance.

I have repeatedly stated in several of my columns that the Chief Minister is leading by bad example. I have also given examples of the “serial lying” which pervades the AUM governance style. This latest “boo-boo” by the Parlsec is an example “par excellence” of all of the above. It is obvious that when the Chief Minister sidestepped the requirement for EXCO approval in the matter of the voting of ANGLEC shares and when he admittedly willfully disregarded the need to obtain EXCO and Legislative authorization for borrowing two hundred million US dollars, these are bad examples that lead to the kind of misconduct exhibited by the Parlsec and the other inexperienced elected members of his team. On the other hand when one cannot verify who in fact selected the Committee because of contradicting stories from the Chief Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary --- you begin to realize the level of lies and half truths which dominates their political style.

But the Parlsec goes on further to show that he still has not grasped the essence of his error or perhaps his deliberate arrogance based on the content of his second release which is intended to be an apology. In that release he says nothing about the need for EXCO authorization for the launching of such a committee; he only apologizes profusely to the private sector lawyer while slighting over the other nominees including the public service lawyer; he still does not demonstrate an understanding of the disrespect implicit in simply assuming ones availability, and finally; having made the error of not informing persons of their appointments in the public media he proceeds yet again to compound that situation by a lame apology also in the public media. The appropriate thing to do would have been to make a public statement withdrawing the release --- send personal letters of apology to all the persons involved then further inquiring into their availability and willingness to serve on the committee.

The other part to this disaster is the raw politics. First of all the past government managed two processes of Constitutional and Electoral Reform one led by former Speaker of the House of Assembly, Mr. David Carty and the other led by former Justice I. Don Mitchell. The findings of those groups came as a result of wide public consultations. Those findings were well documented and are in the process of compilation. Members of the present Government were involved in those discussions. The contextual framework for the reforms was based on the principle of full internal self-government. In essence what remains is basically the technical aspects of the compilation and drafting processes. And based on the AUF and AUM manifestos, in particular, there are no substantial differences on the main issues. Any posturing or politicking on the process will as a consequence cause us to lose valuable ground and waste valuable resources, unless of course, it is the intention of the Government to now draft an Independence Constitution as the Chief Minister has stated in the international media.

The other part of the “raw politics” is the fact that the Opposition was not invited to recommend anyone to the Committee. This has been a usual practice in all previous reform committees. While one can see the motive in the selection of Members nominated to serve on the Committee its composition does not reflect a clear presence of persons associated with the main Opposition Party. It does not, to quote one of the lawyers selected, “create a climate of goodwill and cooperation”. Indeed it speaks to blatant partisanship that this Government vows it detests and promotes divisionism that it claims to abhor.

So let me encourage the Parliamentary Secretary to muzzle his enthusiasm and put the issue of Constitutional and Electoral Reform in its proper perspective. During the former administration these were matters that encouraged wide public discussion and sought non-partisan support. To play politics and posture with this process would be infantile. A document that is to evolve into the Supreme Law of the land should not be treated like a child’s play thing. It must be considered a document for all the people by the people. Not a “winner take all” game of marbles.

And getting back to the witless “AUM loudmouth” who declared that: “the budget is passed so the AUF has nothing to talk about” --- he needs to be “told” of my comments, obviously hidden from persons like himself, in the bowels of my column in the Anguillian Newspaper. In my January 21, 2011 article I quoted from a New Years address by the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Evans McNiel Rogers because his views also reflect my own: “The situation in Anguilla calls for an atmosphere of patience, understanding, peace, partnership and mutual respect between ourselves and Britain. Not threats of revolution, violence and bloodshed. ………… We need to look beyond the charges and denials of the past year in particular, to better days of collaborative partnership and the forward movement of Anguilla from its current state of affairs …… we need to engage the British Government in a civil, intellectual, respectful and mutual dialogue as it pertains to all aspects of the Anguillian situation. This I am afraid, will not be accomplished with the style, attitude and approach of our present Chief Minister.”

What we were saying in a nutshell was that the entire charade by the Chief Minister and his cohorts was uncalled for! What was required is to settle down and engage the British Government --- and the entire matter with the budget would be quickly put aside. Thus giving us the opportunity to move on to the many more challenging issues confronting us. The fact is we have lost valuable time by refusing to dialogue, by coming up with all kinds of nonsensical conspiracy theories and vacuous threats. Discerning Anguillians would have noticed that amidst the CM’s rants neither the Governor nor the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Officials have shown us any form of disrespect, insolent conduct or any form of retaliation. Even at the ludicrous march to the Governor’s Office where insolence and rudeness was blaringly evident ---- the Governor was extremely calm and courteous. Is the Chief Minister and his supporter’s incivility becoming an aspect of Anguillian politics? I sincerely hope not!

Again to those trusting AUM supporters who cheered obviously in relief at the forum that the saga of the budget seemed to be over, I do hope you recognize that our responsibility as citizens has just begun. We must now ask the serious questions: “ Will the unfair attacks on private investors (foreign and local) by the CM now stop? Will loose talk about an AUF/British conspiracy now end? Will the thoughtless cries for independence now be silenced? Will freedom of expression now be considered a right of all Anguillians regardless of party affiliations? Will the AUM talk show callers and hosts now wipe the tears from their eyes? When will the lies, innuendos and slander cease to be a part of the AUM governance style?

The fact that the budget has “passed”, or to put it more accurately received the prior sanction of the FCO, through simple dialogue and courteous engagement --- only goes to show in the words of Sir William Shakespeare that there was indeed “much ado about nothing!”

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
March 1, 2011

BUDGETARY NONSENSE!!!

If one followed the process and formulation of the budget for 2011, the exercise seemed quite normal, the government made a good attempt to conform to FCO’S requirements in reducing expenditure and raising revenue to bring the budget in balance as demanded. The budget was successfully debated in the House and passed unanimously. But that appeared to have been process part one pending approval, which I guess no one in the administration thought that the Governor would just sign the budget. It would seem that with the Minister ordering the government to take hands off and allow two highly professional experts to come in and do the work, was a very humbling experience for any government.

Much of the difficulty the island has experienced in one year only appears to have come from the absence of due process. It is clear though, that this government does not enjoy the confidence of the Governor or that of FCO much to their very own making. One could determine that from the outset very little regard was given to the authority held by the Governor. Indications suggested that upon entering office the Hughes Government clearly meant to minimize that authority and endeavored to show up the elected responsibility of the Ministers, it appeared that this team set out to govern on its own. The Governor in his capacity appears to be very meticulous in the execution of his responsibility and expected the elected government to perform likewise but instead, there were serious problems with the rules of order and apparent disregard for due process and procedure. The Governor wanted to bring this Government to order. The question right now is did the Government get the message? Due process was given without interference in the budget regard and it passed unimpeded which I believe brought goose bumps to the honorable Chief Minister, that we have completed our work, thanks to our honorable professional staff and the House of Assembly, therefore now we are off to a retreat and “have a wonderful Christmas.” Not so fast, it appeared that FCO had already decided that no signature would be attached to that budget. This appeared to have been known very early on.

I call it “Budgetary Nonsense” because there are no real indications that this budget as composed on December with very little error should not have been approved, as claimed by said very highly powered independent financial experts. “This Budget Stands” reaffirming the confidence expressed in our very own experts therefore, there are clear indications that this exercise was a strategic and a deliberate attempt by the British to make the badly needed attitude adjustment to this government. To impose such a juvenile behavioral punishment would indicate that the Governor felt restless and unable to carry on Her Majesty’s duties in the environment created on the island just under twelve months and had to bring back the lawful practiced of government. Our system of government provides for one central rule and governing order. “There shall be a Governor of Anguilla who shall be appointed by Her Majesty and hold office during Her Majesty’s pleasure for the purpose of administering the Government of Anguilla. The Executive authority of Anguilla shall be vested in Her Majesty. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the executive authority of Anguilla may be exercised on behalf of Her Majesty by the Governor.

When this government took office it appears that no one took time to look up procedure, whether the Chief Minister knew what the process was, he certainly did not take time to instruct his Ministers what it meant to be off the streets of Anguilla and to function in Government. Everyone seemed to have thought that each Minister was an island unto him-self and the Chief Minister was the Head of State. The Minister of Communication ordering Anglec Directors fired, the Minister of Labor issuing his own permits by his own orders, the Chief Minister, by his signature only, approved a two hundred million dollar loan against the assets of SSB. They in fact totally overlooked Old Tar or deliberately ignored its existence. The Governor was insulted, ignored and abused, but on that mystified day when he (the Governor) tried to fire the Chief Minister, it caused shock waves on the interior, and the message got through. The move he made cause serious alarm but brought common sense to bear. Judging from the Governors current statement on the budget he feels that he has accomplished his objective and is looking ahead. Quote; “Now that the experts have completed their work in assisting with Anguilla’s Budget, the next step is to have a good discussion in the Executive Council. Clearly the Governor’s concern is the way forward with anticipation that this government will behave differently.

By: ejharrisxm

“WHEN WILL THIS CIRCUS LEAVE TOWN?”

In my July 16th, Article, “A picture paints a thousand words” I first used the label “three ring circus” to describe the behaviour and style of the AUM Government as they continued on their charade of manipulating the truth hoping thereby “to paint a glorious picture of an open and transparent Government that is for all the people”. The Parliamentary Secretary who I had dubbed “the circus master” had just finished an interview with one of the AUM talk show hosts where he had declared that they were a “good and happy government” and that, contrary to rumour, he and the Minister of Social Development, the Hon. Edison Baird, had a great working relationship. He also used the occasion to bash the former Government and especially me as the former Minister of Finance. It was while listening to that interview that I was told that just a few days earlier, he further demonstrated his disdain for my contribution as a longstanding elected representative of the people and Minister of Government, by removing my picture from its historic space on the front wall of the Conference Room of the Tourist Board with much fanfare --- and in the presence of our international tourism agents/representatives and other non-Anguillian participants. It was at that point that I realized that he has no respect for elected officials who served our country and in the words of Minister Baird “is clearly pregnant with arrogance.”

But the curtain came down on that “circus act” of a “good and happy government” when the text and broadcast of “Eddie Confessions” began to circulate --- and after a period of “stunned silence” on the usual talk shows, last Thursday a further release by Minister Baird broke the silence. It was heartrending to hear a frequent caller to all the AUM talk shows, who is noted for his verbal bravado and scathing rhetoric, shamelessly confess that he had cried bitterly when he heard Mr. Baird’s address. His confessions of grief and tears were further accentuated by a number of the other usual callers threateningly demanding the immediate removal of Mr. Baird as a Minister in the AUM Government. Again one was forced to wonder who is really running the Government --- because these callers spoke with an air of Chief Ministerial Authority. According to one of the usual loud mouths: “He’s got to go NOOOW!!!” Many persons listening to those exchanges on Class FM expressed great disappointment with regards the level of “pettiness” to which politics and governance on Anguilla had descended.

It is almost a year to the day since the AUM Government was sworn in --- and now it has become blatantly obvious that there is a serious dissension within its ranks. While I have been accused through this medium of preventing the Government from carrying out its function --- I protest strongly any suggestion that I can be held responsible for this most recent drama. Indeed, I have not had a structured conversation with Mr. Baird for more than a year. But both this drama and this milestone have afforded me the opportunity to explain why I could not sit idly by over the past twelve months and allow the Government to continue unchecked. Let me now catalogue the issues that I brought to your attention over that period --- as well as for your reflection today.

I will refresh your memories on the issues and provoke your reflections with “sound-bites” from my comments as follows:

After coming to Office the AUM immediately installed new Boards, the foremost among which was Anguilla Social Security Board headed up by a number of its politicos. I got wind of a decision by the new Board to move Social Security deposits from the local/indigenous banks and pointed out the dangers. I wrote: “As a nation facing the impacts of a global recession we cannot afford to endanger homegrown organizations that are central to our survival at this time!”

• I was forced to respond strongly to a statement by the Chairman of the new Social Security Board regarding my right to question his actions through the news media. I wrote: “I would like to suggest to Mr. Astaphan that as a representative of the people of Anguilla for almost thirty years --- and I might add through the electoral process, not by appointment --- and by virtue of being a born and bred Anguillian over sixty years of age with considerable experience --- I do not need anyone’s permission approval or solicitation to comment on whatever I believe affects the people of Anguilla!”

• I was forced to reply to “a wide range of incongruous and conflicting statements” by the Chief Minister in his Budget address “Operation Recovery” in which he accused the past government of “alleged corruption; economic mismanagement and poor governance”. I wrote: “Stop the blame game! You are the Government! You are the man with the plan!”

• I had to comment on the excellent presentations made by the two elected members of the opposition in the budgetary debates as opposed to the vacuous presentation by some of the newly elected members especially the use of the analogy of a “rotten egg” by the Member for West End. I wrote: “The use of that analogy can conceivably turn out to be a label for him. Such labels are known to stick in Anguilla!”

• I had to comment on the CM and the Parliamentary Secretary’s reintroduction of the ridiculous idea of building a new Airport in Brimigen. I wrote: “I remain supremely confident that the Brimigen Airport Project will neither take-off nor land. No pun intended!”

• I was forced to expose the planned “hostile takeover” of ANGLEC by the Minister of Utilities and the Chairman of Social Security. I wrote: “Let us not treat the minority shareholders in ANGLEC like simply powerless spectators!”

• I had to comment on the “Bradshaw style” approach of the Chairman of the Social Security Board and the aura of national political authority with which he spoke. I wrote: “The Chairman and his Board are whittling away at the good will and trust that the system has built up over the years all across this land!”

• I had to express my displeasure at the Chief Minister’s apology for Bradshaw in the presence of the Father of the Nation and other heroes and heroines of the Revolution on Anguilla Day! I wrote: “Hubert mussa tink we Bubba Johnnies for true!”

• I had to comment on the Chief Minister’s continued inability to get an approved budget one hundred and ten days after the election and his ongoing argument with the British Government that they colluded with the past government to cause our financial situation --- rather than settling down and seriously negotiating. I wrote: “The Chief Minister continues to look through the “rear view mirror” rather than focus his attention on the “approaching traffic and the bumpy road ahead”!

• I had to comment on the Chief Minister’s attendance to the Caribbean Tourism Organization (CTO) Annual Conference where he made some unfortunate statements that the Parliamentary Secretary tried to correct. I wrote: “Our statements must be responsible, sensitive and relevant to the objectives we are seeking to achieve and we must remain focused on strategies and solutions --- not loose talk!”

• I was forced to comment on the cowardly attacks by the Chief Minister on civil servants using the shelter of “parliamentary privilege” as well as his statement that it was the FCO Minister that made him borrow 50 million for recurrent expenditure. I wrote: “Times are getting tougher! Stop whining and take charge!”

• I had to speak about the losses incurred through this Government’s inexperienced negotiations with the owners of Cap Juluca simply to give the impression that there is a difference between an MOA and an MOU. I wrote: “The Government will claim that it has been able to extract certain improved benefits --- but in assessing them they exist in words rather than in substance!”

• I had to speak about the poor management of the House by the newly installed Speaker. She allowed the Chief Minister to abuse the rules of procedure by presenting a thirty page document rife with libelous, abusive, misleading, inaccurate, malicious, cowardly, unkind, uncaring and downright nasty statements in response to a question posed by one of his own Ministers designed to evoke that breach. I wrote: “I cannot accept that the Chief Minister or anyone with the slightest strain of Anguillian blood flowing in their veins could have written such a document!”

• I spoke about the inordinate power of non-elected advisers and political appointees in this administration. The fact that they have no qualms about openly threatening the victimization of public servants and even publicly reprimanding elected Members of the Government. I wrote: “This seems like democracy and governance KGB style!”

• I spoke about the specific attempt by the Parliamentary Secretary to mislead the public in the presence of the Chief Minister that Viceroy Resort was sold; a MOU was signed and that the Government would be receiving US$40 million in taxes. I wrote: “This Government came to Office on the basis of lies; it continues to consolidate its support on the basis of lies; it justifies its campaign of victimization on the basis of lies; and it seems content on governing on the basis of lies!”

• I had to speak about the “circus act” when it was alleged by some AUM “serial liars” that the Governor had asked the Chief Minister to resign immediately and call for fresh elections. I wrote: “There were young men in prison standing on the roof waving branches who perhaps felt that this may also be a referendum on their freedom!”

• I had to speak about the Chief Minister’s willful disregard for procedures, legislation, due diligence, transparency, best practices and common sense in granting approval to the Chairman of Social Security to borrow US$200 million from a questionable source. I wrote: “By what moral or imperious authority then can the CM now continue his “holier than thou” tirades about the past government or the former Minister of Finance?”

• I had to speak to the rumour spread around the island by some of the AUM “serial liars” through their journalist sympathizers that Anguilla is a “failed state” and the FCO intends to suspend the constitution and take over. They also went on to extrapolate that we need to go into independence. I wrote: “But they must face the cold hard facts --- the British are not coming they are in fact already here! They have always been here!”

• I had to speak about the mounting cries for independence among the AUM supporters as the CM continues to give the impression that the Governor and the British Government are obstacles to Anguilla’s economic recovery. I wrote: “Why is it that some callers even the hosts of the AUM talk shows lose their voices and wax emotional with tears against an “oppressor” who has long ago unshackled the “chains of captivity” just for the asking!”

• I had to defend myself against attempts by the CM and “all too anxious” AUM talk show hosts and their usual callers to revive the transshipment issue with the view to denigrate me. I wrote: “May I admonish the CM that it is unwise to believe that his continued attempts to denigrate my character will cause me to wilt and go away!”

• Over the last two months beginning with his interview on New Years Eve the Chief Minister made a number of irresponsible comments one of which clearly incited violent behaviour. He said: “the rest of the Anguillians need to follow where the prisoners left off!” I wrote: “How will inciting the population to violence help Anguilla’s case --- or make the case for the British Government to authorize the budget!”

• I spoke ad nauseam about Hubert’s leading by bad example; his loose and irresponsible statements in the public media; his lies and misinformation; his belief that the rules apply to everyone else but him; and his chronic denial of blame for anything. I wrote: “The clear message that needs to be sent to the Chief Minister is that he is in charge and it is time to settle down and do what he was elected to do. Govern!”

I tried to be as exhaustive as my column would allow. I simply hoped to make the point that based on the nature of this sampling of issues I had every reason to comment on the AUM’s performance over the last twelve months. In fact, everything that has worked for the AUM has come as a result of the experience and vision of the Anguilla United Front. They criticized Viceroy --- it is their salvation. They criticized Cap Juluca --- it is their stability. They criticized the airport --- it is now their boast. They opposed Catastrophic Insurance --- it bailed them out. They criticized the handling of Temenos --- they now must return to the same strategy. To summarize, they have not shown the potential to deliver what Anguillians voted for, expect and deserve.

“Eddies Confessions” and the “petty politics” that have ensued seem to reinforce the characterization that this is truly a “circus”. While Queen Bee’s lament in song suggests that we have had enough --- evoking the baneful question: “When will this circus leave town?” When indeed!

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
February 22, 2011



“EXPLOSIVE”

One year after the people went to the polls and changed the government we find ourselves in an extraordinary “explosive” situation on the island. Considering the economic and financial crisis the country is facing today, government has lost focus of its elected responsibility. This appears to be the premise for a total breakdown of normality with the AUM and government's framework which seems to be dismantling and fragmenting on a daily basis.

There is a segment of our population and a very vocal group which is bent on perpetual insanity, with a deliberate political agenda to destroy the civility we have come to accept in recent years. This was observed through the campaign where the level of respect and tolerance for opposing opinions were totally off limit. This small group is without doubt elements of the estranged unelected that the honorable Edison Baird spoke about in recent times that is moving to a radical dimension to destabilize the country. These are the ones questioning the constitutional authority of the Governor, disrespecting the civil and electoral process where decisions of government are handled with in the executive council and executed according to the process. These are the ones opting to campaign against themselves in a governing period, while they hold the reins of government and said group choosing to march from the east towards the Governor’s office while in representation of their Minister from the extreme west of the country.

The process of governing is confined to the perimeters of the elected members in the House. Those appointed to serve in various capacities do enjoy the extension of electoral powers through their constitutional appointment and is required to perform within the rules of order governing the civil process. The rest of us being part of the broader electoral constituent are expected to become subject to the daily process of governing; but some people have adapted the attitude that they are part of the governing process as well, because they hired the government. When a government is elected it depends on its collective ability and individual capability to govern, and discretion in their capacity to compromise to ensure stability. We have a bully team of representatives, each one holding on to their turf. Then we have the bully political operatives and die hard supporters to maintain the life span of the government this is a primary source of destabilization. The average supporter has no knowledge of the in-depth functioning of government and therefore should remain subject to an organized form of information provided, either through a government’s public service entity, the media or a program such as government’s information service but these operatives seems to want to be the ones delivering the bad news further damaging the credibility of the government. The island is progressively trending towards utter chaos and is now becoming a very serious liability to this very government which seems unable to set any leadership direction for governing or the governed; therefore, this lack of direction has instigated a level of descent not seen since the last Hughes administration 1999/2000. This is unacceptable to the very large disciplined majority of us who simply want the country to be governed well.

The most recent uptick in the internal wrangling of this government is between The Health Minister and his rival, seeking the job, honorable Jerome Roberts over the apparent eminent closure of the East End Clinic. The difference of opinion is not riveting because it appears that neither one is sure as to what the actual directive is and it has resorted to a power struggle where the Minister, taking into account that Mr. Roberts is the elected representative from East End, and while he holds the requisite authority, apparently wants to hear from Mr. Roberts in some subjective form; Mr. Roberts is not willing to be subjected in any form at all. I went to East End School when this clinic provided a vital service to both Island Harbor and East End. It is not clear what would be the ultimate end result of this debate but I stand with the community to preserve this iconic symbol of the past in some form. Because of the on-going fiscal situation of the country there might indeed be imminent closure. I support efforts for this facility to remain functional, or become a part of the current developing preserve of this community and its environment which is already being composed of several elements of historic value. These assets must not remain derelict but must be part of the historic value of the community. To close the facility where it becomes another abandoned building dilapidated, as the Old East End School room, would be unfortunate.

It would do our representatives well to think beyond the political impediments they encounter and envision the composure of all of these attributes already to some degree in formation of collective assets contributing to the comprehensive historic value of the community. We have the incomplete, but necessary bird watch to be further enhanced and developed, we also have the little spring on the lower end of the pond which we all as school children utilized for drinking water and of course the school room itself still intact. As I see it, collectively they all should become a central point for the community and be monumental in shaping a comprehensive, social historic multifaceted environment for recreation and amusement complementing the already established historic Museum which would serve both Island Harbor and the East End communities well. Therefore the dialogue between Mr. Baird and Mr. Roberts must be put into some perspective in the community’s interest. This government has lost its focus on the country and is simply wrangling and bickering, either with the Governor or themselves. This must stop in the interest of the country.

By: ejharrisxm



“We ain’t mad at ya!”

I was unable to listen to or attend the opening of the Chamber of Commerce Fair on Saturday, February 5, 2011 because of other events, not the least among which, was the celebration of the lives of some cherished Anguillian women. We are blessed as a people to have such a heritage of strong women who have maintained our communities over the years in countless and differing ways. In fact, Anguillian women have shone at every critical juncture of our history and they continue to be central to the furtherance of our national development in all its aspects and at all levels. May we ever be the beneficiaries of the stability and cohesion that they have brought to the building of our nation! May their souls rest in peace!

But it appears that aforementioned stability is at threat from the “thoughtless” and “inaccurate” rants of the Chief Minister at most the inopportune times and at events intended to promote Anguilla as an ideal environment for both visitors and investors. There were two statements in particular that I must comment on one was “thoughtless” and the other totally “inaccurate”. Though both of these statements were reported in The Anguillian and replayed over various broadcast media, I hesitated as to whether or not I should comment on them in my column. On the one hand I did not wish to contribute to the further circulation of these statements regionally or internationally, on the other hand I felt strongly that since they were already circulated I should ensure that what he said would not be construed by anyone as reflecting the views of all Anguillians.

My decision to comment was further reinforced by the fact that I met a “first time visitor” to Anguilla that evening. He is a major investor in one of the neighbouring islands. And he was invited by a significant local investor to explore Anguilla. The idea was to encourage him to invest in a major joint venture project being conceived for the island. That visitor was attracted by the banners and other displays of the Chamber of Commerce Fair and positioned himself upfront and in the midst of the opening ceremony. Those of you who attended the event, heard the broadcast or read the article would have been aware that the Chief Minister was making the point that he defended the interests of a young woman who had reportedly taken ill because of pressures in the work place. The Chief Minister must be commended for his concern for workers interests. Indeed, all of the people’s representatives must take on that responsibility in an equitable manner. However, his comments were inappropriately general in an industry that is the locomotive of Anguilla’s economy. He said: “The tourism industry makes us poor --- creates slavery. I had to go down to Viceroy two days ago to defend a young woman who was working there, who was destroyed because she immediately collapsed, and had a stroke, because there is a slave colony. Yes they bring in guests but why can’t black people be seen everywhere in high positions? Why bring in straight hair and fair skins from Mexico from East Asia, from around the world, all because their hair is straight and their colour is fairer than yours?”

The visitor and potential investor was standing right within the line of sight of the Chief Minister and had the uncanny and disturbing feeling that the CM was talking directly to him --- because of his straight hair and his fair complexion. He asked me whether the Chief Minister was opposed to Tourism and to foreign investment. And he further inquired, given the recent elections, whether this was the mandate upon which he was elected. His most telling statement, however, was when he said that: “he had heard a lot of positive things about Anguilla but this was the first time he had heard such overt expressions of “racism” from a head of state in the region.” I tried to explain but he told me it was not necessary because he had met a number of persons subsequently and realized that this was not a widespread view among Anguillians. Whether he was being be polite or diplomatic --- our local investor will discover the true situation in the months ahead.

I must proffer my best wishes for a speedy recovery to the young woman who the Chief Minister purports to have defended. Obviously, she must have been under considerable stress. But whatever the circumstances, is it a fair conclusion coming out of that incident for the Chief Minister of Anguilla to declare over public media that Viceroy is a slave colony and the tourism our main industry makes us poor and creates slavery? In the first instance, his Parliamentary Secretary who he made responsible for Tourism has boasted that he has straightened out the labour situation at Viceroy. And the CM, himself, along with the same Parliamentary Secretary have been boasting about that their newly negotiated MOU has brought positive changes to Viceroy. In fact, Hon. Jerome Roberts in his Anniversary Address states: “I also had the opportunity to work with my colleagues on the Viceroy MOU which today has brought the Treasury EC$9 million and we are expecting in the near future to receive another EC$39 million. Viceroy as we are all aware is doing well and has proven itself to be the popular hotel for many visiting celebrities during the course of the Christmas season.”

Is the Chief Minister out of touch with the views of his own Government? Indeed, at some times he seems to be out of touch with his own views --- having just recently boasted to British Officials that Viceroy is an important part of “his recovery plan.” And in fact, he further makes an even more negative prediction in the same speech about his own tenure when he said: “Anguilla is sad, sad. It is really a sad country because in five years from now there will be no Albert Lakes, no Ashleys, No Proctors and that culture of owning business would have disappeared. We are sad.”

Did the Chief Minister in making this “thoughtless” statement not stop to recognize that he is expected to be the one at the helm of the Anguilla Government for at least four of those five years? Is he saying that his land policies, his business licence policies and the labour and immigration policies of his now harried Minister of Home Affairs will contribute to the sad situation he so vividly and passionately describes? Does he not travel overseas regularly on the guise of attracting foreign investment from countries and climes where investors with straight hair and fair skins abound? Are there not born and bred Anguillians who fit these physical descriptions that he seems to detest? Is the Hon. Edison Baird correct in his assertion that the Chief Minister is not in charge? You be the judge!

But that was the “thoughtless” statement let us now talk about the “inaccurate” one. The Chief Minister said: “If you go to Dominica there is not one foreign owned hotel. Everything in Dominica is owned by Dominicans! That is development! Dominica is a rich country whether we say it or not, because they own it!” It seems that the Chief Minister takes great pleasure in belittling Anguilians in the public media. And it is unclear what his motive can be. The whole Caribbean is aware of the pride of ownership which history has afforded Anguillians as well as the enterprising spirit that has sustained us over the years. With all due respects to the people of Dominica, Anguillians own more than eighty five percent of our island’s land resources and we are well represented in every sphere of business activity. That statistic is a matter of the public record locally, regionally and internationally.

My purpose of highlighting this “inaccuracy” is because it is typical of the kind of generalizations and “broad brush statements” that the Chief Minister and his colleagues used successfully in the recent election campaign. And while I generously label this statement an “inaccuracy” it may well be considered a deliberate and outright lie to advance some political deception. Last week I mentioned the scourge of “serial lying”. This statement may be further evidence of such lying and it is my intention to expose such lies whenever and wherever they raise “their ugly heads”. Let me present the facts!

As Dominica now moved more deliberately into the Tourist industry, like Anguilla many years ago, there are a number of traditionally locally owned properties. But as Dominica seeks to diversify its economy the Government is actively encouraging and receiving foreign participation in the tourism sector. The agricultural sector and the manufacturing sector already have a strong foreign investment presence such that the major names you hear in those areas are well known multi-national corporations. Dominica may indeed be considered a rich country for a number of reasons --- but no Dominican can tell you truthfully that: “everything in Dominica is owned by Dominicans!”

Speaking about an agreement with the Government of the Kingdom of Morocco to build a thirteen million US dollar hotel in Dominica, the Prime Minister of Dominica, the Honorable Roosevelt Skerrit, had this to say in the Government’s February 15, 2011 GIS. “ When people talk about the Government of Dominica is not doing things to create jobs --- these are the things we are seeking to do to create jobs. We believe that by the construction of a fifty-room hotel in Dominica, because the challenge we have sometimes in Dominica is that we cannot host international and regional events because of the inadequacy of standard rooms. Even for cricket there are many people who want to come for International Cricket and the World Creole Music Festival but there are so few rooms in Dominica. When you have the largest hotel being seventy-five rooms, it tells you that we have to do much better than that. ….. We need to address this and that is why the Government has taken this bold initiative that in situations where the private sector may not be prepared to venture in a faster manner then the Government itself would play an active role in fetching those kinds of investments. It is not our interest to manage these hotels at all. Our interest is to create economic activity in the country, create construction jobs and also sustainable jobs in the long run. One can appreciate the kind of impact it will have on agriculture and the other services: taxi operators, tour guiding and the likes”.

I thought that it would be important to include this statement in its entirety to show where the Chief Minister has given a flawed representation of the Dominica situation. It is obvious that the Prime Minister of Dominica recognizes the importance of investment both foreign and local as well as his responsibility to create economic activity in cooperation with the private sector as a whole. It also shows that it is scandalous for our Chief Minister to give the false impression that there can be any feasible comparison between Dominica’s tourism sector and that of our island.

But let me go a step further with his “inaccuracy” about “Dominicans owning everything.” If you go on the Government of Dominica website you will see a section entitled: “How do I apply for economic citizenship of the Commonwealth of Dominica?” The preamble to that section reads, in part, as follows: “Government [of Dominica] views the economic citizenship programme as one component of its national capital mobilization portfolio towards its ultimate goal of national development and as such intends to channel capital from the economic citizenship programme towards public and private sector projects where a need is identified.”

This grant of economic citizenship is contingent upon the payment of US$100,000 for an investor, his spouse and two children under eighteen years old. An additional US$15,000 is required for children over eighteen but less than twenty-one years old. A single investor without children or spouse must pay US$75,000. To facilitate this grant of economic citizenship as far back as 1993 the residency requirement under the naturalization and citizenship act was waived. In fact, you can actually and legally apply for economic citizenship without ever setting foot on Dominica.

It is neither my intention nor my right to question the wisdom of the Government of Dominica in using citizenship as a means of attracting investment in this column. That is for the people of Dominica to decide. I am merely pointing out that while the Chief Minister spins a yarn about Dominicans owning everything in their country --- any qualified investor with US$75,000 can become a Dominican citizen. And if you add US$25,000 more to that amount you can include your spouse and two children under eighteen. To put it in more intelligible terms, for less that the cost of a one- bedroom house on a quarter-acre lot in Anguilla, you can become a Dominican citizen. Is the Chief Minister trying to tell us something about his future immigration policies over the next four years? Or is he thinking about inviting experts from Dominica to help us with our immigration and land policies as he did with the ECCB, the OECS and Caricom on the Budget? Please do not rule anything out!

Last weekend, I was amused with the reaction of the AUM radio “talking heads” to the first public meeting of the Anguilla United Front since February 23, 2010. Again I heard the usual ludicrous refrain that the Opposition is not allowing the Government to do its work. The fact is, that in most democratic countries those Governments would be happy to have an Opposition as passive as the Anguilla United Front has been over the last twelve months. I have even heard some AUM pundits declare that the AUF did not even give them three years to get the country going. It is clear to me that this Government and its “loud mouths” believe that the fundamental right of “freedom of expression” in democratic society should not be extended to the Anguilla United Front. While in truth and in fact, the only party that has been campaigning since the election is the AUM.

Should the Anguilla United Front sit idly by and allow the Government to stumble from blunder to blunder and destroy Anguilla while the civil and proper exercise of democracy enjoys a honeymoon? I think not! Should I put down my pen while the serial liars of the AUM continue to mislead, confuse and exploit the trusting people of Anguilla? I think not? There are many members of this community who now assert they made an error at the polls --- there is no need to be embarrassed to admit this! It is a part of the learning process in a democratic system that from time to time the electorate will make mistakes! It is human to err! “We ain’t mad at ya!” We love ya! It’s Valentine’s!

Victor F. Banks

Sachasses Estate

February 14, 2011

ONE YEAR LATER: IRREVERSIBLE DILEMMA????

The country is in a somber mood. No one can actually believe the difficulty we’ve found ourselves in. Who can we trust to give us clear and decisive direction to our quest for the truth? This Island has not responded well to the thunderous campaign of 2010 which brought to power a man who many of his supporters thought is the only one they trusted to lead us out of the peril of this time. One year later there are no signs of any dimension of success for AUM and The Honorable Hubert Hughes in making matters any better for the people of Anguilla. This is a great disappointment to a very large number of Anguillians who had their hopes set very high and a confidence level that gave rise to serious optimism that things would be better under the present government instead, One Year Later we find ourselves in what appears to be an “Irreversible Dilemma”

In a very brief talk with the honorable Chief Minister Mr. Hughes just days ago, clearly not a happy man at this time. He has expressed regret that his good intentions to lead this country out of the present dilemma has been met with such brutal resistance from his number one rival The Governor which appears to be opposing his every move to advance his agenda which he feels would make the difference. I passed up a great opportunity granted to me by the Chief to accompany him to his office so I could be informed in more detail of some of the actual facts he is faced with, time was my main culprit. But no doubt The Chief minister feels that he is forced into a period of gridlock over a massive difference of opinion going forward. Mr. Hughes was very quick to point out to me that there is actually no pun intended here, but he sees the British Government and The Governor simply madly in love with Anguilla and views it as a primary piece of real estate in the North Eastern Caribbean having residence of extraordinary ambition. Mr. Hughes declares that The Governor and his British Colleagues marvel how simple people like us could own and develop our very own property into such interesting and beautiful dwellings, which actually have given this island its great advantage in the mind of the British. Mr. Hughes feels that the British is simply not willing to allow us the right to manage our very own high valued destiny and clearly sees this as his primary obstacle to implementing a progressive plan of action that would put the island back on track.

I was actually impressed with the passion and real deep concern show by the Chief Minister in my very brief conversation, which is in sharp contrast to the account given by another passionate representative just days ago, the Honorable Eddie Baird who gave a stinging rebuke of the current situation in government. One would notice that in Baird speech he was extremely careful not to criticize the Chief Minister direct, when he identified and expressed his reason for descent in this administration, but called on Mr. Hughes to restore order in his government. Baird describes the situation as a major conflict of interest between the radicals and the moderates in the AUM camp, he did not associate Mr. Hughes with those radicals but clearly insinuated that much of the radical agenda with in AUM is being instigated by the parliament secretary (unelected) and other appointed elements within the party whom Mr. Baird categorized as the unelected and unelectable. Mr. Baird has placed the critical situation the country finds itself in squarely on an ocean of disagreement between him and these unelectable operatives influencing the government and failing to agree on anything in the interest of the country. Mr. Baird asked a poignant question, “where is the Chief Minister in all of this.” Eddie seems to be putting the onus squarely on the Chief to choose between having a functional government or a radical group not interested in the well being of the country.

One year later after electing this government to office there is a very serious state of disbelief that none of the indicators of advancement are showing positive trends, now twelve months in the governing process and AUM in control of the government. Instead we find ourselves in what appears to be a very serious dilemma, with very high anticipation that unless Mr. Hughes responds very quickly to the circumstances of this country he will face a revolt from the people who will seek to take back the country and entrust our future to a government with perspective and one willing to meet the requirements that would ensure progress and stability. In my talk with Chief Minister I felt passion and detected a strong and distinct determination, what I did not fell is that this man has any intentions to back down or surrender. Mr. Hughes, in his wisdom has not responded to Mr. Baird’s speech in any form so far. He should not be ill advised either, to respond in any way that would further destabilize the current situation. It would be a very wise move on the part of Chief Minister to engage in a very private and deliberate conversation t with Eddie Baird and begin to set new perimeters to stabilize his government. There is actually nothing going very well for this government at this point in time and it would show some responsibility of the Chief Minister’s part, taking in account his terrible relationship with the Governor, as we speak the British has just about embarrassed the country by subjecting our best and brightest to some degree of incapability in dealing with the current crisis. Mr. Hughes must show some understanding of the situation by a careful reshuffle of his government’s portfolios, change his talking points and bring some degree of order to his administration; he must turn this page. Having four more years ahead there is nothing to lose by making the necessary corrective measures right now. In the absence of quick and decisive action we might indeed be faced with an “IRREVERSIBLE DILEMMA” one year later?

By:  Elliot J. Harri

“HEART ACHES AND BROKEN PIECES!”

Last week Monday was exactly one year since the passing of my dear friend and ardent supporter David Leroy “Feddie” Bryan. As I said when I eulogized him at the celebration of his life on February 13, 2010: “Stoney Ground would never be the same without him!” His passing came just before the elections --- so as a strong supporter of the Anguilla United Front his untimely surrender to his suffering spared him the disappointment of his party’s defeat at the polls. Those of us who knew and loved “Feddie” would appreciate his passion for Anguilla and his belief that the Anguilla United Front was the party best suited to deliver the goods. “Feddie”, we were humbled by your loyalty; emboldened by your confidence, and; will continue to be inspired by your memory! May your soul rest in peace!”

It is ironic that just two days after the anniversary of “Feddie’s” passing, the Deputy Leader of the Anguilla United Movement Government, the Hon. Edison Baird, also a friend of “Feddie”, should release a “confession” on several media, regarding not only their strategy for winning the election but also the serious dilemma we now face as a country run (as he asserts) by “a handful of unelected persons” with a “radical and disruptive agenda”. Like most of our supporters “Feddie” would have felt vindicated by Mr. Baird’s remarks. Despite our many presentations during the campaign and my columns after the election dealing with the very issues --- I must admit that Eddie’s “confessions” will serve as excellent closing arguments for the case against the AUM Government and its willful abuse of the democratic process via the use of lies, misinformation and half-truths. In this regard, if there were such a court, the first evidence to be subpoenaed would be the Parliamentary Secretary’s “notorious black book”! I am referring to his mysterious folder containing many fabricated documents designed to denigrate, slander and malign the past AUF Government and its candidates in the recent election campaign.

But perhaps the most interesting aspect of this latest saga in “the life and times of the AUM Government” is the fact that, in a most uncharacteristic manner, there is complete silence on the airways about Eddie’s speech. A number of AUM loud mouths who have often been accused of having “diarrhea of the mouth” have suddenly contracted a condition leading to “verbal constipation”. Up to the time of writing this column there has not been any significant comment from the Chief Minister or any of his associates about what can only be described as the most damaging speech that I have ever heard by a sitting Minister of Government. We can only speculate as to the reason for this media “black out”. But for the time being someone needs to remind the Chief Minister that there is an “eight hundred pound gorilla” in the room which, despite his efforts to pretend to ignore it, he will be forced to acknowledge its presence at some point.

Over the last year I have only exchanged pleasantries with Mr. Baird. I never discussed any aspect of politics or governance with him during that period. Having noticed the deteriorating relationship between him and his colleagues in the AUM Government --- I made sure that he remained honest about our relationship so that he could and still can truthfully say that there is no political compact between us. However, I will not neglect this opportunity to use his “confessions” to absolve the Anguilla United Front of the many false accusations, half-truths and whole lies promulgated by the “serial liars” of the AUM. As one of my colleagues in the AUF Executive put it: “Serial lying is a very dangerous thing in politics, it is one of the worst aspects of propaganda, because people eventually believe the lies and reject the truth. Anguilla is now suffering the consequences!” It is a well-known adage that “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks” as a result even now after the campaign this pattern of “serial lying” continues to be the modus operandi of the “serial liars” of the Government. In this regard I strongly encourage that “Eddie’s Confessions” become “required reading” for the remaining supporters of the Anguilla United Movement.

Over the last forty weeks or so I have made a number of comments on the performance and conduct of the AUM and its supporters that have been validated in “Eddie’s Confessions” I will “flag up” some of them for your attention:-

• In my May 25th Article, “Social Security Again” I wrote: “There seems to be a tendency by the Chairman (Social Security) to speak with an aura of national political authority”. Mr. Baird said: “It is clear that these unelected persons are exercising considerable influence over Governmental affairs. The Chief Minister has little or no say in running the affairs of the island”.

• In my July 2nd Article, “It wasn’t me” I wrote: “The question must now arise whether this action by Jerome Roberts is to keep Eddie in line; frustrate him to the point of leaving; or simply push him aside once Jerome is installed”. Mr. Baird wrote: “Little did I know that it was his intention to replace me as Minister of Government. I now realize that as a part of the inducement package that persuaded him to join the wider Government was the promise of being an actual minister”.

• In my September 17th Article, “While Big Brother is watching!” I wrote: “Indeed there is a certain sentiment among the AUM disciples that the rules are only for the others. That is why the “Patriot” feels that he can justify being on several boards while he strongly criticized the past Government for such situations.” Mr. Baird wrote: “I believe that the Government must practice what it preaches”.

• In my September 24th Article, “So shall it be in the End” I wrote: “After Haydn boasted in his press conference that a MOU was signed with the new buyers for Viceroy Resort --- the Leader of the Opposition during the debate on the Cap Juluca MOU pressured him to explain how could he have signed an MOU before bringing it to the House of Assembly and Executive Council.” Mr. Baird wrote: “He started out pretending to be the Chief Minister; he is now pretending to be the Government!” And further he wrote: “The zenith of Haydn Hughes’ control over Governmental affairs was reached… when he vetoed a decision of the Chief Minister to take a proposal from a leading investor to the Executive Council.”

• In my June 11th, Article, “To budget or not to budget” I wrote: “In such an environment of uncertainty and unpredictability they (developers) then become frustrated and overly cautious. Developers --- and I must repeat local and expatriate --- are critical to the success of any recovery plan this Government intends to pursue. --- We must therefore build trust and confidence in our investors to achieve this --- not scare them away by political posturing.” Mr. Baird wrote: “What is alarming too, is their failure to appreciate the fact that there can be no economic recovery if political instability continues to manifest itself throughout the island. No rational investor will put new money into our economy, irrespective of incentives offered, if Government is in a state of perpetual confusion.”

• In my October 29th Article,” “Be careful what you wish for!” I wrote: “Fortunately for us, Independence for Anguilla does not require a violent national revolution against our Administering Power. The path to independence is clearly set out in our relationship agreements with the British Government. Civil disobedience is not required only civil negotiations.” Mr. Baird wrote: “Finally, the path to Independence is well known to everyone. It is free of any obstacle. The British Government has repeatedly stated that it is up to the Anguillian people, if and when they desire, to make a determination to sever their constitutional link with the UK Government”.

I have made these selected comparisons from “Eddie’s Confessions” to illustrate that there is considerable confirmation of my several criticisms of this Government’s performance and conduct from a person who was intimately involved in its day to day operations. And that while I received considerably abuse for my dogged pursuit of a change of “style, approach and attitude” (as expressed by the Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Evans Mc.Niel Rogers) by the Chief Minister and his colleagues in the governance process there were indeed senior members of his Cabinet who felt the same way.

But one of my main areas of disagreement with “Eddie’s Confessions” is that he seems to conclude that the Chief Minister is in some way the victim of his own Government. I find this a difficult pill to swallow because as the former Minister of Finance, and never the Chief Minister, Hubert has held me responsible for any thing that has gone awry both in his Government of 1994-99 and in the past Government of 2000-10. Hubert must likewise be held accountable for his own Government. He cannot continue to cry out: “It wasn’t me!” And avoid culpability of all kinds. Is Mr. Baird suggesting that Hubert is above reproach --- or is this his way of giving Hubert a last ditch opportunity to come to his senses and again as Niel suggested change his “style, approach and attitude”?

All of us would like to believe, as I suggested in my article of October 22nd, “Can a leopard change its spots?” that “the CM and his colleagues would settle down and do what they were elected to do --- indeed what they promised they would do during their campaign”. If that is Mr. Baird’s strategy --- I wish him well. Indeed, that is what I have been trying to do for the last forty months or so. But the fact is that it is obvious that the Chief Minister’s behaviour has filtered down to the junior members of his Government as well as the unelected advisors who he “cherishes” and have chosen to assist him. And as Mr. Baird suggested in his “confessions”: “they view the Executive Council as an impediment to the realization of their agenda and the law as an unnecessary obstacle thrown in their path by their enemies.” In this sense, there is absolutely no difference between the action that the Parliamentary Secretary took to have an MOU signed without the approval of Executive Council and the Chief Minister authorizing the borrowing of 200 million US dollars without the approval of EXCO and the House of Assembly. Hubert is leading by bad example! He is not a victim! He is the culprit!

The “serial lying” of which I spoke earlier can be especially traced in “Mr. Baird’s confessions” particularly in the case of the Parliamentary Secretary. But again the Chief Minister cannot avoid complicity. According to the “confessions” he was in the Press Conference when his son misrepresented the facts about the sale of Viceroy; according to the “confessions” the Chief Minister was in the House of Assembly when Mr. Baird corrected Mr. Roberts of his misrepresentation of the facts regarding the settlement of a law suit; the according to the “confessions” the Chief Minister was present when the Parliamentary Secretary said that an estimated US$43 million would soon be pouring into the Treasury; according to the “confessions” the Chief Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary have not been transparent about the Salamander Group after making big promises during the election campaign; according to the “confessions” the Chief Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary have not been transparent about the issue of the impact of accommodation tax and service charge in the sale of villas controversy at Cap Juluca; and so on. As I said in my article of September 24th, “So shall it be in the end”: This Government came into Office on the basis of lies; it continues to consolidate its support on the basis of lies; it justifies its campaign of victimization on the basis of lies, and; it seems intent on governing on the basis of lies. Nothing has changed!”

“Eddie’s Confessions” have made at least five significant points which whether accurate or baseless should cause all of us concern: a) that he devised the strategy that “by targeting and politically destroying the leader of the AUF, Victor Banks, [they] effectively neutralized the other members of the party”--- in that statement he made no qualification as to legality of “the weapons” used; b) that there is political confusion in the AUM “which clearly poses a threat to our political and economic viability”; c) that there may be a handful of unelected persons who “want to impose their radical and disruptive agenda on the Anguillian people”; d) that “the Chief Minister has little or no say in the actual running of the island. [The] only need for him, it appears, is to give formality and legitimacy to their conduct”, and; e) that there appears to be a conspiracy within the Government to depose the Chief Minister allegedly led by his own son.

Where does all of this leave us? After the “serial liars” of the AUM have had their way with us for the past twelve months we hardly know what else to expect. Or even what next to believe! Many of the former supporters of the AUM have nothing to show for their loyalty during the recent election campaign of lies, scandals and innuendos but “heartaches and broken pieces”. Hopefully, “Eddie’s Confessions” will bring some small measure of enlightenment to persons still foundering in this sea of political and economic uncertainty.

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
February 8, 2011

THE MAKING OF A CRISIS

The value of Freedom often comes with a very high price of human casualty and suffering. To misinterpret circumstances relative to our budgetary matters and the economic situation of the island, and to use such an occasion for a call to arms, disrespect for the order of government, disregard for the Island’s Fiscal and Economic Crisis and the blatant anxiety for confrontation with the British Government is nothing less than catastrophic for the people of this island. There is no doubt that at this juncture questions are being asked as to whether our government understands the level of responsibility before the country when they have decided to ignore the rule of law and containment of civil order rather, has set in motion principle factors that would work to destabilize the country. It is a fair analogy to equate the conduct of our government with “The Making of a Crisis.”

As we watch the unfolding of another phase in the historic evolution of a people who have known their fair share of ills and fought with a strong will to succeed, this unpleasant memory is nothing more than a crisis of our own making. Let’s look at the beginning. A victory at the polls, no less than glorious from the perspective that AUF lost the reigns of government and a new era was now ushered in, little did we know twelve months later we would be mired in this turmoil, though not unanticipated we are certainly very disappointed that apparently this government has not sat down in a governing mood and brought to order the business of the country they were elected to do. Whereas, it appears that the British Government intended to execute a well thought out strategy, not necessarily against this government because certainly the previous government had said outlines of disapproval, but it appear that Hubert inflamed the situation when the excitement of his victory got to his head immediately and actually started throwing lose words around carelessly, attacking all facets of British rule on the island and its legitimacy when the power to govern is in his hands.

We have no popular uprising, no chanting on the streets or momentous dilemma confronting the country, just an island in economic peril. There are wild cards here which AUM seems happy to be associated with, as seen when there was a sudden alarm of injustice that the Governor intended to fire the Chief Minister. The generals made a call to her Majesty’s Prison which mobilized the troops from with in the jail walls, some taking up positions on the roof top while others got busy burning open door fires on the grounds making a clear statement. It is not clear to this moment why such a breech occurred and who was responsible for inciting such violence on those protected grounds of Her Majesty’s custody. Another incident worth recalling is the earlier visit of the UK Minister for the Overseas Territories Mr. Henry Bellingham who visited the island in the very early months of The Hughes administration and was greeted with insults and a performance suited for our primary civil enemy and number one culprit of our anger and disdain Robert L. Bradshaw (deceased). The continuous bickering with the Governor and refusal to entertain suggestions and proposals from the Office of Overseas Territories and the Minister direct, acting like rude children rejecting sound advice and instructions that would form the nucleolus of what should be putting the country back on track.

So why did we passed up a great opportunity to govern at this critical time in our history. Nothing is really easy, but nothing too hard for government to do for its people who fought to ensure that their man sits on the seat of power. Talk is indeed cheap and worth nothing when you have lost control of the very vibration of sound speech, but lose talk is like jingles out of rhythm. Why make our lives so miserable with suggestive rhetoric that burns in the flames of anger and bring open dispute to the corridors of our House, our honorable House of Representation. Isn't it better to honor your people with a character of humility and bring change rather than bring us to our knees in shame. This is a crisis, indeed a crisis of our own making, can we bring back to order the civility of this country or we are going to see more fragmentation and dispute, fighting from with in, a struggle now revealed. It became very clear during the political campaign that there were extreme radicals elements in AUM. Eddie Baird is a man of conscience, as youngsters we were regular church goers together, he is a man of faith who knows his profession in Jesus Christ. I believe his report and the country should listen to Eddie’s call on this government to disarm itself from such elements of destruction. We must now question the judgment of Jerome Roberts elected member from East End, how did he missed this observation and was so willing to adapt such principles. Jerome should now rearm himself with civility and work with Eddie to bring the required change the island needs right now.

By: ejharrisxm