“THEN LET THEM EAT CAKE!"

Over the past four days there was a mixture of events that were topics for conversation around Anguilla, one was a wedding --- a new beginning and the other a funeral --- the end of era. It is ironic that a royal love story should swiftly lose its headline billing to the death of a terrorist. And while these events seemed to be diametrically opposite --- romance and crime --- they both brought joy to the hearts of many of the same audiences. I must therefore take the time to briefly speak about both of these news items in the context of Anguilla.

 

As an Overseas Territory with a special and longstanding relationship with the Government and People of the United Kingdom, the Royal Wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton was an event that required our expressions of goodwill and some symbol of our presence as a people. That symbol could certainly have been the presence of our Chief Minister or his representative. Of particular significance is the fact that Prince William could conceivably be the next King of England being second in line to his father. Our Chief Minister’s lame excuse for not attending the Royal Wedding may therefore be construed as an affront to a future head of the Commonwealth that we will be always be part of --- whether we become Independent or remain an Overseas Territory.

 

Last week’s editorial in the Anguillian got the issue right when it stated: “there comes a time when a leader must show some statesmanship regardless of the circumstances in which he finds himself”. Our elected representatives attend such social functions not because of their personal regard for “the inviter” --- but rather in deference to the office they hold and the people they represent. So regardless of the war of words that the Chief Minister has been waging with the British Government --- he must realize that there are a number of Anguillians, including persons who supported him, who are fiercely loyal to and strongly appreciative of Her Majesty the Queen and her Government. And you may have noticed that British Officials have always exhibited the highest levels of decorum in their responses to the Chief Minister even in the face of his most vicious and unfair attacks.

 

I believe that the Chief Minister was probably posturing to impress his supporters and others by acting as if he is being responsible or frugal with Government finances. The fact is though, that he may have lost a great deal of good will for just a few thousand pounds sterling. Or to bring it closer home such negative publicity could neutralize any positive publicity we may have received from the airing of the “the Bachelor” show on worldwide television. And by the way, it still remains a secret how much money the Government spent on the filming of that episode on Anguilla. That also was a love story!

 

On the other hand, the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden was not a love story --- it was the culmination of a huge effort to hunt down a terrorist who was “responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women and children.” Like every other country involved in the travel and tourism trade, Anguilla suffered from the impact of Bin Laden’s attack on the World Trade Center when he used commercial airlines loaded with innocent travelers as manned missiles. The world came to a standstill as it tried to come to grips with the realization that the level of inhumanity in the methods employed by terrorists in the cause of a perverted justice had risen to a new high. And that travel worldwide would never be the same. It was that action by Bin Laden that led to a decline in Tourist arrivals to our region for more than a year after the 9/11 attacks.

 

Amidst the joy and celebration with the capture and killing of the architect of worldwide terrorist operations there is the uncertainty as to how this action will contribute to the elimination of Al Queda, the organization that he controlled and employed to execute his terror attacks around the world. Such uncertainty highlights the challenges facing small economies like Anguilla as they struggle to survive in an environment where the products and services we sell to the rest of the world are dependent on issues of safety and security. Our tourism is impacted by concerns for safe travel and the viability of our financial services sector is constrained by a global perception that our financial centers may be used as channels for the funding of terrorist organizations. And while the death of Bin Laden may have brought some closure to the many relatives and friends of the victims of his reign of terror --- we still must face the reality of the seeds of evil that he planted in his disciples around the world.

 

I believe that the vulnerability of our island to negative fallout from events like the wedding and the funeral requires that we live by our wits. Anguilla cannot afford to squander any opportunity to advance our standing in the eyes of the outside world from whence we derive investments and customers neither can we destroy or neglect any advantage we have to be competitive as we seek to build a viable economy for our people. It is for this reason we must continue to evaluate the decisions we make as a Government to determine how they impact key assets we have as well as formulate strategies to create an environment conducive to optimizing the return from those assets for our national development.

 

This is the context in which we must consider the impact of the Levy on local and foreign investment generally in Anguilla but particularly in the area of our fledgling financial services sector. I am aware that while I write, practitioners are already in the process of putting together a new “Anguilla Finance” organization with a view to marketing the industry and will be conducting a Strategy Planning Conference this weekend to look at critical issues related to its future direction. Actions taken by the Government with regards the Levy are likely to change the quality of the product we have been selling since we ventured into the area of Financial Services more than thirty years ago.

 

Anguilla has always promoted itself as a tax free jurisdiction and in recent years to keep pace with the changing regulatory environment we have signed a number of Tax Information Exchange Agreements (TIEA’s) which have had the effect of making us compliant with the requirements for operating in the global financial marketplace. The question will certainly be asked whether this action by the Government is the “thin end of the wedge” for the introduction of other forms of income tax? And because of the paucity of information on the Levy will Anguilla really be able to boast that it is a tax-free jurisdiction?

 

For many years since we began to modernize our legislation; introduce “leading edge” technology in our Commercial Registry and strengthen our regulatory system, the present Chief Minister, while in opposition, was constantly complaining that we were being obstructed by the British Government from creating a robust Financial Services sector and in doing so he has always pointed to the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda. That would be his standard line whenever a Bill relating to financial services was brought to House. His statements were usually general rather than specific, but they did highlight the important need for balance in regulation to avoid the possibility of regulating our industry out of business. In other words he appeared to recognize the importance of being competitive in the industry. Indeed, as the “new kid on the block” it is important that our jurisdiction stays ahead of the game.

 

In the present period, however, it would appear that the Chief Minister is not paying attention to the damage the Levy, his Government supported in the House of Assembly, can cause to our jurisdiction. And unlike his readiness to renegotiate MOU’s and MOA’s that are legally binding he seems reluctant to begin the process of repeal of this bad tax --- and a surprising readiness to accept the flawed opinion that only the Secretary of State can repeal a Law. We must be aware that the same islands BVI, Cayman and Bermuda have zero tax arrangements for their industries. In this context, the Chief Minister may be well advised to consider that he may be guilty of creating the same obstructions to the development of the financial services sector on Anguilla if he refuses to heed the advice of the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Evans McNiel Rogers and repeal the Levy. In this competitive environment for the providers of financial services we can ill-afford to allow anything to affect this important plank of our national economy.

 

While I remain hopeful that reason will prevail as several interest groups explain to the Chief Minister and his Government the serious consequences of some of the actions they have been taking --- I was seriously disappointed to hear the Chief Minister’s response to the Leader of the Opposition’s explanation of why he was wrong to conclude that he could not initiate the process for the repeal of the Interim Stabilization Levy Act. The Chief Minister delivered a very dull and rambling presentation in which rather than dealing with the issue --- he resorted to his usual diatribe about the Governor, the British Government and the Anguilla United Front (AUF), accusing them of willfully conspiring to oppress the people of Anguilla. And as he mumbled through a letter from the former Minister of the Overseas Territories to me on January 18th, 2010 --- I was reminded of the Eunuch of Ethiopia when asked by Phillip the Apostle if he understood what he was reading replied: “How can I except I have someone explains it to me”. He definitely did not understand that the Minister did not suggest any tax measures; the past Government did not agree to any tax measures; and the fact that the then Chief Minister did not reply to his letter is a clear indication of a serious difference of opinion on the financial situation which was clearly outlined in the Chief Minister’s letter of September 14, 2009. A letter that the Chief Minister has and I hope he will be willing to read in its entirety at his next presentation. I also noted that he interpreted the civility of the letter between the Minister and myself as being “chummy” or friendly. Again a clear indication that he does not understand that one can make strong points without being rude and/or disrespectful.

 

Indeed, the Chief Minister needed someone to explain that letter as well as his discussion about the budget and budget deficits. Mr. Hughes continues to perpetrate the lie that the AUF Government took deficit budgets to the House of Assembly. Let me use his tactic of repetition but in this case of the truth rather than his lies --- and repeat that since Anguilla was taken off grant-in-aid in 1983 no deficit budget that has gone to the House until the AUM’s three budgets over the last twelve months. And further his statement that there were ten years of deficit budgets since the Anguilla United Front came to Office in 2000 is either a blatant lie or a demonstration of his total ignorance of the budgetary process. The first recurrent deficit since 2002 was a deficit of 2.9 million in 2008 when the recession struck. Indeed, how could we accumulate fiscal reserves of over sixty five million if we did not have a surplus on the recurrent accounts? Obviously, Mr. Hughes needs someone to explain to him the difference between overall balance and recurrent balance. The overall balance includes long-term loans and the debt service for which, is calculated as part of the recurrent expenditure and as a consequence should not be “double counted”.

 

Let me make it simple for the Chief Minister to understand, even though he boasts that he has never borrowed from a bank in his life. (Quite unlike most of us!) “Chief Minister & Minister of Finance! One does not calculate ones total house loan and/or total car loan in ones expenditure for the year it was received! One writes them off over the period of the loan! Similarly, if the Government takes out a loan to do a major infrastructure project it is not included in the recurrent budget as an expense!”

 

And I am sick and tired of hearing the Chief Minister repeat ad nauseam that he met a deficit of $70 million when he came to office and reduced it by $21 million in two months. In fact, I have heard one of his talk show lawyers repeat the same nonsense just the other day. First of all how was it possible for the Chief Minister to reduce the deficit in two months if he never raised enough revenue in any of those months to meet his recurrent expenditures? Could he reduce his recurrent expenditure by $21 million to achieve this? Obviously not, his expenditure was already cut to the bone. But the Chief Minister either needs to understand the truth --- or tell the truth. Like the past Government he was able to finance his deficit by borrowing. Unlike the past government, however, he borrowed excessively from the Social Security Board and used the reserves the AUF had lodged in the European Development Fund. But the reality to which Mr. Hughes must admit is that we are in the midst of a recession and like the AUF if he were to leave Office tomorrow he would bequeath to the next Government the same challenges he now faces as the recession continues to hold.

 

What has come out of the entire behaviour of the Chief Minister as he tries to convince the electorate that the issues outlined by the Opposition are malicious and do not apply --- is that Hubert is out of touch with the reality of the situation and the dire straits in which many Anguillians find themselves. To quote the Leader of the Opposition in his welcome statement to Minister Bellingham: “unemployment is increasing; salaries and benefits are being reduced; no new jobs are being created; and the banks are exceeding their generosity with delinquent customers such that repossessions and foreclosures are both frequent and imminent.”

 

What about this reality does the Chief Minister not understand as he continues to believe that criticizing the Governor, the FCO and the AUF will solve our problems? It reminds me of the statement attributed to the French Queen Marie-Antoinette during the eighteen century. When told that her subjects were in dire straits and without bread she responded quite casually and insensitively: “then let them eat cake!”

 

Victor F. Banks

Sachasses Estate

May 3, 2011

CRITICAL REVIEW!!!!

It is not unusual for a newly elected government to experience setbacks, or to be facing difficulties upon entering office! What is unusual is, for a new government entering office with what was an excessive energy level to become so distracted in such a very short period. Every government tends to show its strength and demonstrate a governing strategy early on in its tenure. However, this government is showing serious distraction, which is a troubling sign when the country is without doubt still in decline and everyone is hurting. Indeed there is ongoing tension between the Governor and the Honorable Chief Minister which seems to be having a compelling negative drawback on its function. The continuing squabbles between the two most important elements of power in the country, is actually threatening to derail AUM’s stated goal of returning the island to prosperity. In fact, fulfilling this basic premise and campaign promise is proving to be a much greater task than anticipated. This predicament is strangling any achievement in economic mobility in the short term and is threatening to derail AUF’s success.

Drawing this conclusion is not based on political expediency. A clear critical review or analysis would show that the ongoing circumstance the island faces, and the practical progression of a disorganized and dysfunctional political inner circle in AUM is having a very serious negative impact on the mechanism of government and the administrative process, which appears somewhat dysfunctional it’s self. Consequently, this predicament might be impeding the function of the various organs that make the system work effectively. Hearing recently from a long time Finance expert from the Ministry of Finance, he indicated serious deficiency in the drafting of the critical Interim Stabilization Bill which should have been a mechanism imposed to improve the country’s revenue intake and contribute to a balanced budget, but instead was drafted to become a nuisance to the general welfare and now an impediment to the recovery of the island’s economic situation, whereby penalizing the working class and rewarding those highly paid civil servants and politicians and the private sector as well, earning above the minimum threshold set by government for contribution. Such a bill shows immense insensitivity. This Government should be reminded that they rode into office on the single most unpopular issue in the political campaign, the extraordinary high salaries paid to AUF Ministers and upper level civil servants. This issue was deliberated, and methodically exposed by Sir Joe Hodge, impacting the campaign with intensity which eminently brought down AUF. The AUM campaign did not promise to roll back the salaries but did strongly criticize AUF for not showing sensitivity enough to what they called “the poor people.” This Government has now exhibited an even more gross atrocity, given this very gentleman reason to criticize then on said issue.

The wave of controversy Government finds itself in is perhaps an impediment to its optimal performance and is causing some frustration in how the island is administered as an Overseas Territory of the British Government. The Director of the Overseas Territories Mr. Colin Roberts on a recent visit to the island continues to make positive remarks of the relationship between Anguilla and Britain, indicating that the new coalition Government has a new attitude and approach with a positive commitment to the Territories. He also revealed that they are closely monitoring everything on the island including the various remarks on the blogs. The Director expressed confidence in the function of the Governor and made it clear that whatever we hear from the Governor is approved by his office and the British Government; he made remarks of the talent in our government administration, most likely referencing the work done on the 2011 Budget. The Director, on behalf of the British Government continues to make positive gestures to Mr. Hughes and his government, offering a hand of friendship in the interest of Anguilla while our Government continues to ignore that goodwill.

It is not clear what has restrained The Honorable Chief Minister from being party to the royal wedding on behalf of our country as one of Britain’s regional affiliated states. Even the half State of Montserrat was honored to be present, while Anguilla appears to have once again become a victim of the Chief Minister’s attitude and behavior. Certainly if our Chief Minister has been deprived of the honor to the wedding of the freshly crown Royals, it would be because of the totally unnecessary and abusive attitude to the British Government, who in turn refused to honor his distinguished presence before the Queen. It goes to show how the effect, or none effect of a government dragging along an entire nation, consequently under circumstances undesired. It must be understood that when one is elected to Office in our country, that responsibility transcends politics. Functioning in this High Office is by protocol and not one’s personal desire or likeness. As such all elected persons functioning in a ministerial capacity must understand that they represent the country as a whole and not their party, in fact, the entire political chaos of the country is a developing phenomenon, a mischaracterization of duty to the country after being elected under the banner of a political group. It behooves our government to be at its best at all times in the interest of the Anguilla people.

Lose language, unnecessary rhetoric, none cooperation with the British Government a retaliatory vague Independence call and various insults in high places and a consistent rejection of direction is becoming a serious case of misdirection for the country. Consequently, such conduct has brought on a significant degree of higher supervision not seen under the AUF government of the past. The strategic body of advisers, consisting of several high powered lawyers, some of which are directly linked to the function of the Chief Minister and advises him directly, must be questioned to the effective use of their brilliant minds, taking into account the steady drift the country is on. All of these incidences deserve nothing less than Critical Review.

By Elliot J. Harrigan

“WHO WILL ROLL THE STONES AWAY?”

In Christian communities, the Easter season provokes both sadness and rejoicing as we journey in our reflections through the pain of the crucifixion, to the joy of the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus the Christ. There is also the ongoing debate among believers as to which is the most important season --- Christmas or Easter. Is it the birth in a lowly manger or the cruel death on the cross that most adequately symbolizes the depth of God’s love for mankind? Should the merriment that characterizes the Christmas season also be a feature of the Easter tide? In traditional Anguilla the answer to both these questions were obvious in our culture. Both “the Manger and the Cross” demanded that we spent time in fellowship and reflection on our faith. And equally the community responded with festive expressions of all kinds during both seasons. As a youngster when the island was, for the most part, divided among Anglicans and Methodists the celebrations for the religious holidays were shared to ensure that the entire Christian community fellowshipped together in the merrymaking and fundraising for their churches --- void of conflict.

While our society today has become more complex --- the vestiges of this tradition still remain even down to the Easter Monday cricket match between the Anglicans and the Methodists. Unfortunately, while the sale of food dishes and confectionaries; the “platting of the pole”; the music and the games remain --- the cricket match is but a wind-ball cricket “fete match” which the Anglicans have dominated for the last six years. While it is all in good fun --- as a Methodist I must complain that it is always played on the Anglican home ground and every year they seem to come up with new rules. As one of the Methodist team members remarked: “You all still mad because Reverend Wesley left and formed his own Church?” But despite it all we can hardly wait until next year! Look out Bishop Brooks, Rev. Richardson has us in training already for next Easter Monday!

But the newest addition to the Easter weekend festivities is Festival Del Mar (Festival of the Sea). It began in 2008 and has become a permanent part of the Festivals Calendar ever since. Like a number of other Anguillians I look forward to this festival because of the spirit of community and the cultural atmosphere it engenders. Being naturally averse to wading through large crowds, I picked my spot and enjoyed the Festival for several hours on both days. Everyone seemed to be having fun despite the present financial constraints and most importantly and according to reliable reports the entire festival passed safely without any major incident. Safe and crime free!

A number of questions arose at the table where I was sitting among the steady wave of friends and acquaintances that stopped by from time to time to chat and fellowship. While the topics were numerous ranging from music, to boat racing, to crab racing, to religion, to business, to politics and so on --- there were a number of specific questions about the Festival. When did the festival start? Who started it? Who are its main sponsors? Does the Government fund it? Who is it targeting? What is the long-term vision for the Festival? How can it be improved?

Being a part of the Government during the period of the launching of the Festival I had many of the answers --- but it occurred to me that here again was an important part of history that may be lost. But I was even more moved to do something about the lack of information when at least four separate persons stopped by the table and made the comment: “Whoever came up with this idea should be highly commended!” Then what “took the cake” was when I heard someone remark: “Boy! Haydn and Sam really did a good job putting together this festival!”

Don’t get me wrong! I commend the Government for retaining and supporting Festival Del Mar but I feel duty bound to put the record straight and give credit where credit is due, especially based on the obvious curiosity which abounds. The answer to the first two questions: “when did it start and who started?” can be found in the 2008 Anguilla Tourist Board (ATB) Management Report by the then Director, Mrs. Amelia Vanterpool-Kubisch. She wrote:

“Festival Del Mar, a new event was staged for the first time in Island Harbour. The idea and concept, developed by the Festivals Coordinator (Fitzroy “Briggie” Thompson) was embraced by the Island Harbour community, who took responsibility for the organization of the weekend activities. It was well supported by the community, persons from throughout the island as well as visitors to the island.”

So there you have it! The idea and concept of the Festival was the brainchild of “Briggie” and started in 2008. But of course the journey from an idea to its realization can be an arduous one and the original vision must be the driving force all the way. The question regarding the long-term vision of the Festival and its early organizers is answered in a Press Release from the Festival Coordinator on 26th February, 2008. Briggie wrote:

“Festival Del Mar, which means (Festival of The Sea), was discussed a few years ago at one of the Anguilla Tourist Board retreats and the feeling at the time was that this event should be developed as a community based festival. This year we have decided to introduce this event in the festivals calendar and to host it over the Easter weekend of March 22nd and 23rd. The focus of this festival will surround the sea with all cuisine and activities sea related. The thinking is that this festival has the potential to;

• Enhance our tourism product as it affords locals and visitors the opportunity to enjoy amazing cuisine and meet local fishermen in their natural setting.
• The festival can be a means of creating and increasing awareness as to the importance of the fishing industry within the economic/tourism development on Anguilla, with a view towards sustainability within the fishing sector thus lending to the continued enhancement of livelihoods.
•  The festival can bring together the fishing community of Island Harbour (renowned as one of the historically, primary fishing villages on the island) to showcase their fish and seafood offerings prepared in various ways.

Also the fact that the eastern end of the island does not have a major tourism project at this time, we think that an event of this nature will be embraced by the Island Harbour community, thus leading to the sustainability of this event.

To ensure community involvement we have met with a wide cross section of persons in the community, some of whom now make up the Festival Del Mar organizing committee, as follows:

• Mr. Othlyn Vanterpool – Chairman
• Ms. Portia Bryan - Secretarial
• Mr. Timmy Webster – Boat Racing
• Mr. Claude Smith – Fishing Tournament
• Ms. Lillian Webster - Fundraising
• Mr. Keith Harrigan – Beach Setup

This team has been working with members of the Tourist Board and festival office to design the festival and will be called upon to assist with the full coordination of the festival activities. Also we have suggested that preference be given to persons from the area in regards to vending.”

Without question the Festival lived up to its vision and the important point raised by one of the commentators is that it is the kind of event that brings out Anguillian culture in its purest form and in a manner that has appeal for both residents and visitors. And because of the strong community involvement the total budget for the first Festival was less than EC$ 20,000. Interestingly, the original committee seems to be practically intact and it is not readily obvious that any divisive politics has seeped into its organization. For both these reasons the event seems well suited for these particular times.

The deliberate policy by the Anguilla Tourist Board to create a series of events to target particular groups is a part of a wider policy espoused by the past Government to broaden the island’s tourism product. And according to the 2008 ATB Management Report “the Board assumes the responsibility for the organization of the Annual Summer Festival and Tranquility Jazz Festival, provides support to the Anguilla Arts festival, monetary contributions and marketing support to Moonsplash, the Anguilla Regatta and Festival Del Mar”. So while I have taken the time to use my column to highlight the history and the vision of Festival Del Mar I am conscious about the other events that began a considerable time before, including the Anguilla Summer Festival, for which there is a similar shortage of information as to its origins.

I am certain that by providing this information some readers will be enlightened while others may be encouraged to really find out more about the importance of festivals and events to the development of our product for the enjoyment of both residents and visitors. But most importantly, take notice of the opportunity provided to showcase our talents; preserve our cultural practices; create business opportunities, and; side by side with the destination’s reputation for top notch dining bring attention to the “delectable dishes cooked up by our local cooks and served roadside as well as at small beachside stands all over the island” --- which many critics of international cuisine hold in high esteem. Many of the food lovers who took in the Festival Del Mar experience last weekend would have come away with similar raves about the mouthwatering dishes served up.

But the Easter merriment and the tasty wares at the Festival could not curb the underlying tension associated with these testing times. And very often talk about the Levy surfaced in the conversations sometimes as humorous quips and at other times in serious discussions. At our table on one occasion the argument reached a shrill pitch as a young woman despite the relaxing and entertaining environment could not help but vent her frustrations in the most vocal and animated manner. Her comments brought home to me that there were a number of persons, many who supported the present AUM Government, now looking for reasons to justify and rationalize their actions for imposing the present tax measures. In this particular case, the young lady wanted to convince herself, that the Government had no option but to impose the Levy in its present form --- because the past Government had agreed to it many years ago. The shrillness of her voice, to be more accurate her screams, obviously exacerbated by “stimulating beverages” caused many heads to turn as she tried to make her arguments more persuasive by a scary loudness.

The report I received today on the Chief Minister’s recent radio interview is that he is circulating the false impression that only the Secretary of State can repeal the Levy. Based on Section 57 (1) (a) and (b) of the Anguilla Constitution, there is no question that all Bills require the assent of the Secretary of State before becoming law and except in cases where there is an Order in Council --- Bills are generally initiated by Executive Council then passed through the House of Assembly. Similarly we do not sit down in Anguilla and wait for the Secretary of State to initiate the process for the repeal of an unsatisfactory Law or Act. Having made the case to Executive Council that a particular Act needs to be repealed for good reason --- we then prepare for it to be taken to the House to be debated and hopefully passed. This is the course of action that the leadership of the Anguilla United Front is standing squarely behind.

It appears that the Chief Minister is using Section 59 (1); (2) and (3) of the Constitution that deals with the disallowance of laws to suggest that that is the only method whereby the repeal of an Act can be achieved. Either he has not sought the counsel of his constitutional advisors or he is deliberately trying to sabotage the Leader of the Opposition’s initiative to do what is necessary to have the Interim Stabilization Levy Act repealed. After all, Section 47 of the Constitution cannot be any clearer when it states: “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Assembly, may make laws for the peace, order and good government of Anguilla”. This means that the Anguilla Legislature has full powers to introduce and make laws for Anguilla that include by definition both their enactment and their repeal where necessary.In actuality, Hubert would want us to believe that our elected Government cannot do anything about bad laws that may exist on our books unless the Secretary of State takes the initiative.

This blame game must stop! It is never the Chief Minister and his colleagues! It is always the AUF, the Governor, the developers, the FCO, the civil servants, or someone else. Fortunately, we are finding that despite the occasional AUM diehard who refuses to accept the reality of our plight, there is a growing awareness that the Government is “piling stones” in the way of real progress. And to stretch an Easter metaphor --- the serious question is being asked; “Who will roll the stones away?”

Victor F. Banks

Sachasses Estate
April 26, 2011

AN OPPORTUNITY LOST WHILE CM HUGHES TURN'S HIS BACK ON ANGUILLIANS

I would like to respond to some unfortunate statements made by the Chief Minister in an interview with Radio Anguilla regarding a request by myself as Leader of the Opposition to the Speaker through the Clerk of the House of Assembly to convene an urgent meeting of the House to discuss a motion to repeal the Interim Stabilization Levy Act.

My letter was sent to the Clerk on April 14, 2011 was based on the strongly held position by the Anguilla United Front that it is “impossible to implement the Levy in a manner that would be fair to all concerned”. It was our position then, that with two weeks remaining it would be possible to begin a process for repealing the Levy by first presenting a motion in the House of Assembly to debate the merits of such an action. It was our hope that such a process could provide the Government with an opportunity to get the full backing of the House to make the case with the British Government that the implementation of the Levy was presenting issues of unfairness and inequity and should be repealed. But I did not stop there. I also included in my motion a resolution to establish a broad base Tax Commission “to undertake a comprehensive review of Anguilla’s Tax regime by the end of June 2011.”

The Chief Minister in his interview made a number of statements that prove that he is either the recipient of bad advice or is not using his legal advisors effectively. His comments suggests that he does not understand the Constitution under which he is operating neither does he understand his role as an elected official and a member of the Anguilla House of Assembly. The Chief Minister made the following statements:

1. 1. The repeal of an Act or a Law is only done under orders and approval of a Secretary of State.

1. 2. He said that I have been misguided by the Leader of the Anguilla United Front, because it is not within his competence to do something which is ridiculous.

1. 3. He said that he would be definitely showing his ignorance to seek the repeal of the Levy.

I must say that the Chief Minister has lost an opportunity to place the blame of the Levy squarely on the British Government. If he had joined with me to make the case for its appeal in the House of Assembly and the Secretary of State then decided not to give it his approval or assent he would have been in a very strong position. He would then be able to put some substance to his arguments that the British Government was forcing him to impose the Levy. What has happened now is that he is saying to the Anguilla people that he cannot represent them in making laws for the furtherance of their interests.

The Chief Minister is totally wrong in his interpretation of the Anguilla Constitution as it refers to the repeal of bad law. Section 47 of the Constitution provides that “subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Assembly, may make laws for the peace, order and good government of Anguilla”. This means that the Anguilla Legislature has full powers to introduce and make laws for Anguilla. The act of making laws also includes the act of repealing laws. Like in the making of laws so does the repealing of laws require the assent of the Secretary of State.

Section 55 (1) provides that “subject to the provisions of this Constitution and the rules of procedure of the Assembly, any Member may introduce any Bill or propose any motion for debate in, or may present any petition to, the Assembly, and the same shall be debated and disposed of according to the rules of procedure of the Assembly.” This is self-explanatory. Any Member may introduce a Motion. Any member may also introduce a Bill. The only exception to this provision is in sub-section (2), namely, “any Bill or motion making provision for imposing or increasing any tax etc. A motion for repeal of a Bill obviously is not proposing any increase in taxation. Rather, to the contrary, it is removing a “bad tax” measure that is not prohibited under this section.

Section 57 provides that the Bill shall become law upon assent by the Governor. It becomes law immediately upon the Governor’s assent, but the Secretary of State has power to disallow the Bill later if he has good reason to do so. The importance of this point is that unlike the Chief Minister’s statement this means and demonstrates that the Secretary of State is not involved in the Legislative process from the introduction of the Bill to its assent by the Governor. It means that the Chief Minister is mislead and as a consequence is apportioning authority to the Secretary of State that the Secretary does not have. The Secretary of State cannot prevent any motion from going to the House neither does he have the authority to initiate the process of any enactment or repeal of any Act in the Anguilla House of Assembly except by Order in Council.

The Chief Minister is therefore using Section 59 (1) of the Constitution in the wrong context. This section deals with the disallowance of laws. It happens after the legislative process. The Secretary of State’s involvement comes at the end not at the beginning. That is the elected Government’s role through Executive Council and the House of Assembly. That is why the Chief Minister and his Colleagues were elected and that is why he is called “The Leader of Government Business in the Anguilla House of Assembly”. The Chief Minister seems to be seeking leadership from the Secretary of State rather than taking the initiative himself to relieve the burden of a “bad tax” on the people he was elected to serve even if he has to do so with the support of an Opposition motion. I believe he has lost an important opportunity by not supporting this Motion.

It is interesting how, Hubert Hughes, a leader who for years spoke about championing the cause of the ordinary Anguillians is now refusing to support an important initiative to represent the same Anguillians he claimed to love so much. Hubert Hughes is in fact abdicating his responsibilities as Chief Minister to the Secretary of State. This confirms Minister Baird’s comments in his “Who runs Anguilla?” speech. And questions whether Mr. Hughes can provide the leadership required to take us through these tough economic times.

Fellow Anguillians, this recent set back caused by the Chief Minister’s ignorance of his role will not deter us from pursuing the repeal of this “bad tax”. We will be taking further steps in the days ahead and will certainly take this motion to the next sitting of the House of Assembly.

Evans McNiel Rogers

Leader of the Opposition

Anguilla House of Assembly

WHAT ABOUT THIS STORY??

Let’s get real; this week is actually called Holy Week! When we slow down, take some time off and meditate on the “Death Burial and Resurrection of Our Lord and Savior “Jesus Christ.” Because we are a community of many religions and various celebrations, this ceremony is called “The Celebration of the Christian Church.

To make the distinction between the Christian Church and other denominations sometimes minimizes the commitment of mankind to the sacrifice of “A Man, A real Man!” for us all. But indeed, there is a balance, and one must judge with real acknowledgement that such a sacrifice actually deserves the best possible conduct of humanity. The term Christian often stirs tension among religious people because some Churches tend to celebrate the Christian life in different forms and therefore call into question the true belief of others. The real story behind the church however is the person “Jesus Christ” who really is a “Spirit,” and God Himself, that’s the three persons in one God we were taught about in Sunday-School. This story should be a personal one to all mankind who lives by faith and not by sight. As humans, we all react differently to the truth, but each must recognize within one’s self weather such a story told of a man crucified, dead and buried could indeed be a fact of life; even more dramatic, “He rose the third day and walked away from the grave. Does this story resonate as one that is true to you? Or just another tale; “Here lies your spiritual destiny!”

The Human mind tends to react to action more so than real solemn moments, but the heart of man is where the spirit and soul functions. The story of Jesus Christ, his birth, death and resurrection is true! Not an imaginary drama. You must judge yourself deep within your heart and see if you really believe such a narrative. (The story) because the transforming power is in believing, believing in his name; and your transformation begins with you truly believing in him. We must know this, God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship him in spirit and in truth. This means that, obviously there are worshipers out there who do otherwise and there are other spirits out there.

This Easter week is an appropriate time for each of us to love our neighbor and extend a hand of fellowship as the Lord himself would, it is more so a time to give serious thought to your personal situation and make sure that as time fleets by you are ready when your name is called at that great moment, when you alone steps out there. That’s the moment time stands still, and we’ll know for sure we’ve reached our long awaited destiny.

This week is also a great time for our government to reconcile their differences in the interest, and good of the country. Government needs to reconsider the Bill before the people; this bill will hurt the island and the average person that still lives by simple means. Anguilla cannot afford the regime of taxation imposed in recent months, and certainly cannot allow government to saddle the lower income people with the weight of these measures. This Bill must be reconsidered, recalled and re adjusted. With this, to all my friends, well wishers and associate, I take this moment to wish you a very Happy Easter with the richest blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Happy Festival Delmar!!!!!

By: Elliot J. Harrigan    

“WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR IT?”

One of the statements often heard from the Chief Minister, other members of the present Government and their supporters while in Opposition was that the British Government was going to place Anguilla under higher supervision because of the conduct of the “United Front Boys”. Which is a phrase that Hubert irreverently used to describe the past Government. He also spoke about the need to have a commission of inquiry into the conduct of those Ministers. And “to crown it all off” one of his own Ministers, during his inaugural speech in the House of Assembly, spoke about a stench emanating from the very head of Anguilla United Front organization. A stench he likened to that of a rotten egg.

Just a few months after this Government’s first anniversary in Office it would appear as if higher supervision has come to Anguilla. In a Press Statement, His Excellency the Governor revealed that he had “reluctantly” decided to exercise his residual powers under the Constitution and, in the interest of national security, intervened into the conduct of the Minister of Home Affairs in the issuance of visa waivers to persons requiring such for travel to Anguilla. Ironically, the Minister in question is the same Minister who, in that show of piety and self-righteousness, had intimated that the past Government was rotten to the core. Even worse is the fact that the majority of his colleague Ministers did not accept the Governor’s strong and “evidenced-based” recommendations that the practice by the Minister should be suspended.

As a former Minister myself and as an Anguillian I am not happy for the Governor to reach a point where in his own discretion he feels he has no choice but to use his residual powers. But I must reluctantly submit that he gave the Chief Minister and his Minister several opportunities to deal with the matter discretely. The Governor’s concern with the Minister’s conduct was documented since the visit of the Minister for the Overseas Territories to Anguilla. And the Chief Minister openly refused to have any discussions with the Governor on these matters and on one occasion created a “smoke screen” by alleging that the Governor asked him to dissolve the House. Readers will also recall that the same “smoke screen” also served to incite talk about Revolution; Independence and uprisings in H. M. Prison.

The question must arise as to members of this Government’s understanding of their role as Ministers. In several pieces in my weekly columns, I have pointed out that the Chief Minister is leading by bad example. And that as a consequence there is a general lack of awareness by his Ministers as to what constitutes good governance; proper procedures and strict adherence to our laws and regulations. For the Chief Minister’s part it has become increasingly obvious that he believes that the rules apply to everyone but himself. This attitude now seems to characterize the behaviour of many of his Ministers. What is equally worrisome is that many of the Government’s supporters seem to be adopting a similar approach. In fact, if you were to listen to some of the talk show hosts sympathetic to the Government on this matter you would get the distinct impression that there is a serious injustice being perpetrated on an innocent Minister who in the words of his first cousin, the Chief Minister, is a decent individual.

It is not my intention, in this column, to stand in judgment of the Minister’s conduct. Neither is it my intention to question the Governor’s actions --- he has already made his position clear under the present Constitution. But I do feel duty bound to raise a few simple questions that may be instructive. First of all, did the visa processing arrangements for applicants from the jurisdictions in question break down to the extent that the Minister found it necessary to issue over three hundred visa waivers in less than twelve months? If that were the case why did the Minister not initiate discussions with the British Embassy in those jurisdictions to improve the arrangements?

Secondly, since travelers from most Caribbean countries are typically not tourists but rather persons looking for employment --- what jobs were these persons seeking in this depressed economy? On the other hand if the visa waivers were granted to genuine visitors how did the ratio of visitors from those jurisdictions increase so drastically since this Government came to Office?

Thirdly, if the Minister was made aware of the potential risks and the fact that a number of his waivers ended up in the hands of known criminals and persons with possible criminal intent --- why did he persist in this practice even after he was warned and after a number of his supporters including “men of the cloth” demonstrated to defend his innocence to charges of abuse of office levelled against him?

Fourthly, How does the Minister justify the issuance of five visa waivers to five young women between the ages of nineteen and twenty-two years of age to visit a single farmer living alone? Four of those visas were issued on the same day and one just a few weeks later! Were these five young women related to the farmer? Or were they just pen pals? It should be noted that the Minister issued these visa waivers even after he was informed that his conduct was under investigation.

And finally, does the proliferation of visa waivers granted to persons from a particular Caribbean Country have any relationship to well-known campaign promises made to nationals from that same country that were eligible to vote?

The point of my observations is that on the basis of well-documented facts a reasonable conclusion can be drawn that the Minister was either deliberate or misguided in his actions. Like the Minister of Works he seems to be unaware of the limits of his authority and to be of the belief that he is not required to seek the advice of his technicians or follow proper procedures --- but feels that it is his role to dispense directives based on political motives and expediency. And what is even more surprising is that persons with legal training would try to defend the Minister’s misconduct by speaking about selective interventions suggesting that the past Government indulged in similar practices and the Governor did not adopt a similar response. The record would show, however, that the past Government during its entire tenure of Office did not grant a fraction of the amount of visa waivers under the signature of the Minister of Immigration. In fact, indigenous Anguillians and other belongers of Anguilla have been expressing grave concerns about the laxity of immigration practices during the last twelve months.

There are many persons who applaud the Governor’s handling of this matter because they regard the Minister’s actions as indefensible. There are also others who feel that the Governor did not go far enough mainly because they are not happy with the performance of the Government generally and see this as an opportunity to hasten its demise. And of course there are those who because of their affiliation with the Government have been led to believe that this is a part of another grand conspiracy by the Governor to destabilize their Government. One thing is certain, even strong supporters of the Government attest to the fact that there is no doubt that the Minister was not acting in accordance with the relevant Immigration and Passport Act and that his actions could have threatened our social stability.

I felt that I had to touch on the potential impact of the Minister’s conduct on social stability even in a period when our focus has been on economic and financial stability. The members of the Anguilla United Front have not been speaking out about the matter because we feel no reason to gloat on the Governor’s exercise of his residual powers. We feel that it is in fact a shame that an elected Minister of Government should need to be disciplined in this way because of conduct that shows irresponsible leadership and which betrays the loyalty that his supporters demonstrated even at the heavily guarded gates of the Governor’s Office. Furthermore, were I not to make some mention of this issue in my column I may also give the impression that our party does not acknowledge the relevance of such conduct to the constant decline in the state of our nation, socially and economically, since this Government has ascended to office.

Since I mentioned “economically”, let me of necessity return to the Interim Stabilization Levy Act (the Levy) that we have been discussing ad nauseam for the past six weeks or so. Our efforts on the various media, platforms and in the House of Assembly have not met with any success in getting the Government to rethink its position on the Levy even at this eleventh hour. In fact the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Evans McNiel Rogers, in a final parliamentary move “wrote to the Clerk to the House of Assembly on Friday April 15th, requesting the Speaker to convene an urgent meeting of the House of Assembly to repeal the Interim Stabilization Levy Act recently passed in the House on March 24, 2011”. Such a meeting is to be held by Friday, April 29, 2011.

The views of the Leader of the Opposition in his letter to the Clerk were very clear: “it is impossible to implement the Levy in a manner that would be fair to all concerned --- efforts by the Government to discuss the implementation of the Levy have met with a great deal of public outcry because of real issues of inequity, fairness and compliance”. Both the Leader of the Opposition and his colleague, the Hon. Othlyn O. Vanterpool were strong opponents to the enactment of the Bill during the debates because they felt that “there was not sufficient public consultation and that generally the Levy was more burdensome on the lower and middle income earners. They also raised issues related to the compliance process and particularly as these relate to the self-employed”.

The motion for repeal of the Levy is very thorough in its presentation and reflects many of the issues that our party has raised over the past six weeks. It is our hope that the Leader of Government Business, the Hon. Chief Minister, will advise the Speaker to allow this urgent meeting to be held for the repeal of this Bill. In that eventuality, we would have used up the procedural options available to us for preventing the implementation of a Levy that is not fair to the most vulnerable of the taxpaying community. We sense, based on the fact that at least one of the members of Government did not vote on the Bill, that there is room for further consideration.

I chose to attend the last of the several public consultations on the implementation of the Levy that took place at the St. Gerard’s Conference Center, on Friday April 15th, 2011. I selected that particular session because being “self-employed” this was one of the categories assigned to us and also because I strongly believe that this category had the most issues with compliance. I was not wrong. However, I also witnessed another side of unfairness, when I realized that after all the rhetoric and political bravado in the House of Assembly, the Comptroller of Inland Revenue was left “standing alone” for four days to defend the Levy to the entire community of the self-employed and employers. There was no Minister of Finance, no Permanent Secretary, Finance, no representative from the Attorney General’s Chambers, and no other Minister at the session to assist the Comptroller with the consultations. The Advisor to the Minister of Finance, the Hon. Jerome Roberts was in the audience during the period of my presence but did nothing more than assist in the conveyance of the microphone to persons making interventions --- and that he did only for a short time.

The unfairness of that consultation struck me as I recalled that during my tenure as Minister of Finance I sat in on every single consultation of my Ministry as well as other Ministries. In fact, I am now forced to remember those public consultations when, though I was not the Minister of Lands or Physical Planning, I had to bear the brunt of the attack by forces in the community opposed to the Physical Planning Bill. I was attacked to the extent that there was a petition for my recall as an elected representative as well as a march to the Governor’s Office to present it. In the face of overwhelming criticism --- where were those Ministers who voted for the Levy when the Comptroller needed their support?

Where are those demonstrators and petitioners who saw injustice in the creation of a national plan to protect the individual rights of all landowners within the context of the common good? Are they still around? Is the moral activism that attended the outrage expressed for the Indians now poised to protest the unfairness inherent in this destabilizing Levy? Should the motion by the Leader of the Opposition to repeal the Levy fail to be passed in the House of Assembly --- will those forces be prepared to demonstrate against the injustice against lower and middle income workers, the employers and the self employed from their own communities? All of the above lead to that frequently asked question around Anguilla today: “Who’s gonna pay for it?”

Victor F. Banks

Sachasses Estate

April 19, 2011

REPORTING THE NEWS!!!!

Professional news reporting is a primary means of educating and informing the people of Anguilla and putting to rest much of the miss information the island is accustomed to. It is true that in today’s rapid expansion in information and technology, upcoming generations are very actively engaged in the universal phenomenon of advancing technology. News on Anguilla has not innovated to any serious level of advancement even though we are probably out numbering the rest of the region in ownership of radio stations. It is tempting to go back, way back to the analogy that Anguillians take pleasure in copying their neighbors interests just because they can accumulate a little more debt to their credit. This is a new age and the mouth piece of broadcasting has an imperative impact on the human mind, their decisions and their advancement, that also goes to TV broadcasting and reporting as well. Our radio stations are a compilation of broadcast waves all doing the same things and saying the same things at different times of the day in a very simple competitive context. They all think alike, act alike.

What we have in our news and information gathering in Anguilla is the most insignificant dissemination and diffusion of any narrative to improve the audio or visual anecdote to upgrade the intelligence and practical understanding of what is indeed reality on the island. Our news broadcasts are actually, the reading of a well written and expressed essay which does not compel the attention of the audience unless it has to do with a bit of information that is already out there in some distorted form and their interest is to clear it up and hear whether the melee is true or not. It is time we elevate from that level of news broadcasting on Anguilla with an objective other than being purely political.

For those in the dissemination of information, and in the news business, here are some facts on reporting the news; there are two terminologies to news broadcasting which are defined as Hard news, Soft news. Hard news reports on important events require a direct lead, summarizing what happened, satisfying the immediate or urgent curiosity or your listeners, then elaborating on details and perhaps raising speculation on the overall significance of the event. Stories that aren’t quite as urgent or important can be approached differently; which is termed soft news. Soft news however requires what is called a delayed lead, which sets up the story in a way that has the listener in suspense wanting to find out what else the reporter has to say. The news must be reported in a factual objective manner. People want factual information. There are other kinds of news gathering to give content to better news reporting; there is opinion reporting and reviews. News reports often profile important peoples and things, trade and special interests articles also make interesting news editions.

Hard news is further described as, straightforward reporting of current events or situations, and usually begins with a concise summation of the event or situation, then expands coverage to include significant details. It quotes from people connected to the situation or event. Hard news item provides no more than the five elements essential to objective articles, with little or no amplification. You utilize the five Ws: WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, AND WHY. Who; is the subject of your reporting! Lean, straightforward reporting gives clarity to the story and leaves the listener convinced. WHAT; represents the event initiated by the subject or in which the subject participates. WHEN and WHERE; supply more information regarding the event. WHY; may explain either the significance of the event or the motive of the subject. Listeners need the information by all five essential elements to fully appreciate the information they’re being given. If we are to assist the public with what’s a true story that are factual and spell bounding, the reporter must go and get the news, make contact with the story, and for the benefit of informing and educating the people “REPORT THE NEWS.”

What is amazing is that since this government took office there has been an abundance of news that has gone unreported, and therefore everything remains basically speculation and here say in the minds of the people. It is all left to the discretion of whom ever to offer up some details they want to. The basic guidelines and principles of news gathering and reporting are not applied and there is a serious lack of factual information to convince people of what is really happening on the island. The continuous conflict between the governor and the Chief Minister has gone unreported too long, now the conspiracy on one side or the other is broadening. Reporters need to go and get the news from those who are the news makers, get interactive and report the story for the benefit of educating the people and feeding them facts. When the Governor gives his story, there will be aspects he will refuse to go in, but the reporter has to get as close to the facts as possible. Then most certainly who ever the opponent is, will be glad to rebut and tell their side of the story, and the people will judge for themselves. With this current Visa waiver issue, there should be a distinct profile on the Minister and a factual report on the scandal. The facts, the logic, the story and the answers, all lie in professionally and accurately REPORTING THE NEWS!!!!!!!

By: Elliot J. Harrigan

PRESS RELEASE! PRESS RELEASE! PRESS RELEASE!

Hon. Evans McNiel Rogers, Leader of the Opposition and Elected Member for Valley North, today wrote to the Clerk to the House of Assembly requesting the Speaker to convene an urgent meeting of the House of Assembly to repeal the Interim Stabilization Levy Act recently passed in the House on March 24 2011.

In his letter the Leader of the Opposition expressed the view that it would be “impossible to implement the Levy in a manner that would be fair to all concerned.” He also explained that “efforts by the Government to discuss the implementation of the Levy have met with a great deal of public outcry because of real issues of inequity, fairness and compliance”. He therefore suggested that the process for repealing the Levy should be completed before the first payments become due and payable by the end of April. The Speaker was therefore requested to convene a meeting on a convenient date before Friday April 29, 2011.

The Motion by the Leader of the Opposition reads as follows:-

WHEREAS the Interim Stabilisation Levy Bill was approved by the House of Assembly (HoA) on March 24 2011 with 2 members abstaining, 5 members supporting, 2 members opposing and 1 member of government not voting;

AND WHEREAS it is a stated policy of the Government of Anguilla to seek thorough and complete public consultation on proposed laws before they are debated in the HoA, as was the case with the Education Bill and the Domestic Violence Bill;

AND WHEREAS the Interim Stabilisation Levy Act seeks to impose a tax on the income of the persons working in Anguilla without having had adequate public consultation before the Bill was brought to the HoA for debate and approval;

AND WHEREAS the Comptroller of Inland Revenue referring to the Bill admitted in the Anguillian of Friday 8th April 2011 that “... even though the bill has been passed, there are still quite a lot of operational procedures that need to be worked out” and that “it was such a rush and we are still working out the nitty-gritty of the Bill...”;

AND WHEREAS the Act only seeks to raise EC$9.7M annually in revenue, an amount that can be raised by more equitable measures;

AND WHEREAS the tax imposed by the said Act is inequitable giving the larger income earners in Anguilla the biggest relief, while causing the middle to lower income brackets to bear the greater impact of the Levy;

AND WHEREAS the said Levy will criminalised innocent Anguillians if they inadvertently breach the strict provisions of the Act;

AND WHEREAS the Act gives to Comptroller of Inland Revenue and other authorised officials the authority to assess ones earnings, which assessment may be done by examining the personal banks accounts of individuals;

AND WHEREAS there continues to be more questions than answers and significant “loopholes” relating to the Act as is evident from the open discussions with the public on the implementation of the Act;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Interim Stabilisation Levy Act be repealed and the GOA of Anguilla enter immediate negotiations with the British Government to arrive at a longer period of time in which to balance the budget, thus alleviating the need for such stringent and inequitable tax measures to be imposed on the people of Anguilla during this time of economic hardship;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Government of Anguilla in keeping with Anguilla Fiscal And Economic Recovery Plan, 2009 – 2011 establish a broad base Tax Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of Anguilla’s Tax regime by the end of June 2011.

The Leader of the Opposition and his colleague the Hon Othlyn Vanterpool, Elected Member for Island Harbour had expressed strong opposition to the enactment of the Bill during the debates in the House of Assembly. They both held the view that there was not sufficient public consultation and that generally the Levy was more burdensome on the lower and middle-income earners. They also raised issues related to the compliance process and particularly as these relate to the self- employed.

Mr. Rogers noted that the decision to call an urgent meeting of the House is entirely left to the discretion of the Speaker, but he expected in such matters she would be inclined to consult with the Leader of Government Business, the Hon. Chief Minister, to make such a determination. He further emphasized that a date for the meeting must be before the first payment under the Act is due and payable at the end of the month.

Anguilla United Front Information Department

Caribbean Commercial Center Suite 29

April 15 2011

“RISE! MOST NOBLE AND WORTHY KNIGHT!”

We were all saddened last weekend when we put to rest two young people who passed from this life amidst circumstances which must concern us all. I was moved by the comments made by Bishop Errol Brooks as he delivered the sermon at one of the funerals. Admonishing us not to stand in judgment, he said: “This death is like every other death!” At the risk of misinterpreting what the “Bishop” meant, I believe that he was saying that whether one dies from old age; a prolonged illness; a debilitating disease; an accident; murder, or; as a result of a mental aberration --- the effect is the same --- the manner of the death is unimportant --- we would have lost a loved one.

Like at every funeral ceremony there are different reasons why people attend. There are family, friends, associates, co-workers, classmates, neighbors, persons who empathize with the circumstances of the deceased in some way and unfortunately, and to be brutally honest, some persons who simply come, as we say in Anguilla, “to look news”. In that regard this weekend was no different. What was different, however, is a real sense that there are things taking place within our communities that need our attention. It can truly be characterized as a strong foreboding that demands that we question where our society is headed. What are the “demons” possessing the lives of so many among us --- young and old --- leading them to behave in ways that are most unfamiliar? What can we do to stem the spread of the negative influences; the alien doctrines and the nefarious practices that are taking root in our communities? What have we lost in the process of transitioning from a traditional to a modern society? How can we restore those “coping mechanisms” which were inherent in the social, cultural and spiritual upbringing of previous generations?

Our deepest condolences go out to those loved ones for whom this weekend must have been especially trying. Many of us have experienced similar losses over the years and fully appreciate the pain you may now be undergoing. It is not unusual that you may question: Why? What would this aborted life have become --- were the circumstances different? One source of comfort as a Christian community is our strong belief that it is all a part of God’s plan.

But the weekend was not only about reflections on those who passed this transitory existence --- it was also a time to celebrate the life journey of an individual still traveling on. An individual whose blessing of a long and healthy life may have allowed him to touch, in some way, the lives of even the very young people we put to rest on Saturday and Sunday. I am referring to the Service of Thanksgiving to celebrate the eighty-fifth year in the life of Mr. Albert Applebaum Richardson Lake, OBE. Affectionately known to us as “Mr. Lake” or simply “Lake”.

We should never neglect an opportunity to celebrate milestones in the lives of both persons and institutions that are of significance to our country’s national development. In my estimation, Mr. Albert Lake is both a person of great significance to, as well as a veritable institution in, the development of Anguilla. He is the epitome of the “Anguillian dream” and a monument to humility and instinctive intellect. It is for this reason that I am grateful for the opportunity provided for us by Mr. Lake’s family to show our appreciation for the manner in which he has touched all our lives as well as his huge contribution to every aspect of Anguillian life and community. And those of you who know Mr. Lake would know that he was not a willing participant in the staging of that event --- and that in fact the organizers would have had “their hands full” in getting him to show up, never mind the prospect of having him take an active part. In fact when the speeches, the toasts and the “cake cutting” were completed I had no idea when he disappeared from the main dining room.

In a most brilliant delivery at the Thanksgiving Service, his niece, Mrs. Donna Banks, vividly captured the essence of Mr. Lake’s life dealing cleverly with even the more delicate aspects of that journey in a very discreet --- yet precise manner. Perhaps one of the greatest testimonies in her presentation was when she said: “As God has blessed Lake so he has in turn blessed so many through his words of wisdom and benevolence. He has met people at their point of need and has stopped misfortune in the lives of many whether it was in the form of cash to pay a bill, assistance for medical attention, affordable land to build a home, credit to build a property or buy food, financing for education, donations to worthy causes and charitable contributions to schools, churches etc; burial of the dead shelter in a time of need; employment and relief from debt burdens. Lake has a heart of compassion and a spirit of wisdom and a discernment that will spot a scam and a schemer from afar”.

At the reception many other persons had the opportunity to pay tribute to Mr. Lake and to mention ways in which he had touched their lives personally --- as well as to speak of his contribution to Anguilla generally. And like in Ms. Banks’ presentation, the recurring themes of hard work, generosity and wisdom pervaded the several kudos heaped on him during the evening. Many times during the evening several speakers highlighted his almost legendary love for agriculture and livestock rearing. And it was especially noteworthy that everyone expressed the clear understanding that his contribution could not have been possible without the support of his dutiful wife, Mrs. Octavia Lake. As Donna puts it: “Lake is not self-made, for behind every wise and successful man stands a woman who says yes you can, and makes sure it is done!”

From my personal standpoint I can recount many aspects of my life and that of our family that have been touched by Mr. Lake. But that may only serve to portray my bias and as a consequence diminished the credibility of my assessment that he should be held in the highest esteem. Indeed, many younger Anguillians will not appreciate his invaluable contribution to our country if we only speak about what he did for us individually. I would suggest that his life itself is an example that should illustrate that from whatever humble beginnings we emanate --- we can rise to great heights by hard work, application and an enterprising spirit. Like many others in my lifetime I can recall Mr. Lake as a youngster walking through the village selling meat from a tray on his head. At that time he did not have a shop, he did not own a home, neither did he have any personal land. Today Mr. Lake has the most expansive places of business on the island and owns an abundance of real estate. He is undoubtedly the most successful homegrown entrepreneur. His very existence is an inspiration to the empowerment of our people, particularly our youth.

There are those who will be cynical, because of a few mischievous stories about the manner in which Mr. Lake acquired his assets, particularly land. They remain what they are --- mischievous stories. No one has ever presented to me any concrete evidence that Mr. Lake did not negotiate with him/her in good faith. On the contrary, I have heard stories where he was extremely reluctant to acquire property from willing sellers who were in dire straits. This seems to be replayed today in these challenging times when so many persons facing issues with the banks seek out Mr. Lake to get a more favourable arrangement than that of having their property go on auction. Such cases are in the present period --- not rumours of yesteryear and they illustrate Mr. Lake’s continuing role as a bastion of stability in our community. And on the other side of that equation are the grateful stories of his willingness to sell to landless young people seeking to acquire land at affordable rates to build their first homes. He is a “one-man regulator” of the real estate market as he seeks to empower industrious and ambitious young Anguillians.

Mr. Lake has never stood in the way of any Government’s genuine intention to provide critical infrastructure needs for Anguilla. No Government has ever had to compulsorily acquire or even threaten to compulsorily acquire any land owned by Mr. Lake for which they had produced a realistic and viable development proposal/plan. And he has never been engaged in any long or protracted discussion over compensation or land exchanges. His motivation is always to facilitate national development and this attitude of making his land resources available is not only extended to Governments alone --- he also gives land at concessionary prices and as grants to NGOs and CBOs like churches, schools and other charitable groups. His philanthropy is not pretentious or selective it springs from a genuine desire to promote the overall wellbeing of Anguillians.

Hurricane Donna that struck Anguilla on September 4, 1960 saw the destruction of a large percentage of Anguilla’s housing stock. Before that time, hurricane resistant structures such as those that proliferate today were few --- and traditional building techniques though sturdy had given way to some shortcuts over the years. Mr. Lake as a young entrepreneur took the risk to import building materials in large quantities to address the rehabilitation and recovery effort in the aftermath of Hurricane Donna and his vision soon placed him ahead of C. Rey & Company (The Factory) as the leading provider of building materials and supplies on the island. From this initial step into the construction sector, Mr. Lake continued the tradition of financier, a role that every merchant in traditional Anguilla was called upon to play. He naturally became the catalyst for a new trend in home ownership that was facilitated by his willingness to provide credit arrangements to many young ambitious Anguillians desirous of building their own homes. In essence, Mr. Lake was the accessible island banker who knew all his customers by name and “nature”. He was consequently, at the centre of Anguilla’s foray into more sustainable housing --- a feature that has distinguished Anguilla from many islands in our region for many years.

The reports on the Anguilla Revolution often places Mr. Lake in opposition to many actions of that period --- but if truth be told Anguilla could not have survived without the stability which entrepreneurs like Mr. Lake provided. Mr. Lake in particular was able to procure supplies from several other sources when Anguilla faced a period of isolation from several regional and international shippers and suppliers. The hostile actions against Mr. Lake by ill-advised factions of the revolutionary movement did not deter him from expressing his views about the issues of that period even in the face of live bullets pummeling his family home during the cover of night. These incidents did not quell Mr. Lake’s determination to serve his country and despite the differences of opinion many in the top leadership of the Revolution maintained a special relationship with him and even sought his counsel. Indeed, the Anguilla Revolution could not have been successful without the role Mr. Lake played in creating an atmosphere of commercial stability.

Mr. Lake is a model citizen. He is law-abiding. He is courteous and respectful to everyone. He pays his fair share of the tax burden willingly --- and it is his wont to suggest measures for enhancing Government revenue and revenue collections. Mr. Lake has never been accused of trying to evade the payment of any duties or taxes. He is a firm believer in the doctrine of paying ones own way. And is known for being a man of his word in all aspects of his business dealings. He places a great premium on being civil --- on civility.

I could go on and repeat a lot of the things that have been said during Sunday’s celebration about Mr. Lake as a great man --- but this is not the purpose of allocating this issue of my weekly column to his honour. My objective is to establish the high esteem with which Mr. Lake should be held --- and to submit that it is our responsibility to ensure that the highest level of recognition within our system of merits is extended to him. Let me at the outset say that there are many other persons who deserve similar mention in other fields --- but in the field of commerce and industry Albert Applebaum Richardson Lake has no equal. He stands alone!

It is my intention to initiate an application to Her Majesty The Queen for Mr. Lake to receive a Knighthood for his contribution to the development of our nation and the empowerment of our people; for his philanthropy to the many social causes that he has espoused; for his exemplary leadership; for his lifetime achievement that serves as a monument to the “Anguillian dream” for all young people, and; for his unswerving loyalty to the British Commonwealth as a whole and Anguilla in particular. In such an application I would expect that Mrs. Banks’ presentation on His “Life’s Journey”, this Article and other published testimonials will serve as supporting documentation. And I hope that very soon he may be privileged to hear the declaration: “Rise! Most noble and worthy Knight!” “Rise! Sir Albert!” … or words to that effect.

Victor F. Banks
Sachasses Estate
April 12, 2011

HONORABLE SIR, DID YOU KNOW??

Honorable Sir, You’ve been played a good ball? Is your team winning? The general consensus, that at the time of your election the mood of the country was right for change, the electorate, while hesitant and very reluctant gave you the right to rule. They placed their confidence in you to lead and be a guiding light. Your eye must be on the ball, and not to pick a fight. Play your game well; keep your rumble on, only time will tell. To be honorable is distinguishable; it bears on society by characterization and quality of representation on behalf of the nation. It is not an endorsement of ideology or political philosophy; it is bestowed by grace and humility on those fit to rule and discharge the reputable task of governing sensibly. As such one must be cognizant that any political office is temporary and the must be people first, such an office is only given to one they trust. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you to execute your authority with wisdom and dignity, in the interest of all the people, with humility.

Honorable Sir, did you know, the people trust you to lead on matter of concern and prestige? Have you placed their priorities right and analyzed the challenges ahead? Or have you set your very own agenda instead; what about our sovereignty? Does that require the confidence and assurance that such an issue is handled with the utmost caution and importance, or honorable sir, do you think that such an issue that characterizes a people, a proud people should be kicked around on the airwaves without seriousness, distinction and such emotion? Are you saying independence is what we should aspire, or this is for real, because it’s your desire. It must be so, Honorable Sir, that this island deserves your best; you must be mindful that we are watching you, what you say and even how you beat your chest. We’ve heard you say, you’re now ready to lead the way. So just be smart, and be wise, even if despised, remember, as leader with a very strong will, we are asking you to lead with wisdom and skill.

Is it so, Honorable Sir, that you chose to lead with without compromises, but from the point of governing, is that wise? You must ensure that you are right before you lead the way to a fight, and consider your next move carefully, for the good of the country. Honorable Sir, there is no doubt, that the British is very cautious about what they pay, but what does it mean to engage those that say, you are a man who wants everything your way! Some say you are a man of war, did you know, we are a territory under the rule of British Law! Do we have an option today? Or to be lead by what you say. And, did you know that we are governed by our constitution which we hold so dear? Why not adhere to the rules and allow no one to live in fear. Why not partner up with the Governor, bring some calm to the country and consider the fight over permanently. The budget is now signed, that’s now a memory; show us some skill, diplomatically, lead like a man with a strong will to make things right, and not to be always picking a fight. But no, here you go again, you want independence, which you know won’t be so, not in your life for sure, Did you ever think, it’s not about you, it’s about us, Honorably Sir, it’s the people first!!!!!!

So, it is fair to say, being our man of honor, we love you anyway! Trust in God before you say a word. Then speak with influence, being a man of substance; keep the controversy down as you go along, eventually we would all see, how effective governance spurs democracy. Where is that impulse that personifies your state of mind, even in your budget debate we saw some decline. The British asked you to cut you spending levels, instead you opted to tax. Why couldn’t you just lower your income, and all those that seem so high, and make sure that everyone gets a piece of the pie, let’s make sure that we don’t create a poor class again, because some of these salaries seem insane! Some too high to be taxed overall, while some too low to be taxed at all. We all should give back and try to get Anguilla back on track.

By: Elliot J. Harrigan