“A HERD MENTALITY!”

Mr. Victor F. Banks

I feel compelled to repeat a comment that I have been making regarding the way in which the AUM Government and its supporters interpret the concepts of “democracy and freedom of expression”. I have been saying that they (the AUM) believe that the rights inherent in these concepts are for their benefit only. I have had reason to express this viewpoint in/on several media, including the political platform. On the last occasion, a friend of mine, who is a supporter of the AUM, wrote a letter in the Anguillian in which she erroneously accused me of making disparaging comments about her, regarding finance, on a political platform in Island Harbour. Given the delicate nature of the issue I refused to respond, even in my own defense, because I felt confident that sufficient persons would have heard my statement and eventually put her right. Additionally, I was heartbroken that she was advised or that she, of her own volition, felt the need to publish very private and personal information in the local newspaper. As a matter of decency I had no wish to be drawn into such an exchange. But I make the point to illustrate that very often such supporters of the AUM respond to information and statements which they have neither heard nor read. In fact a few “loud mouths” begin the chatter, very often starting from a false premise, then it “grows legs” as the “usual callers” get on board never even bothering to check the facts. Meaning no disrespect, it is a “herd mentality”.

Two events over the last four days highlight this attitude by AUM supporters. First was the decision by the Anguilla United Front (AUF) to travel to St. Maarten-St. Martin over the weekend to hold a series of town hall meetings as well as a retreat for the Executive Committee and other invited members. The second was the Speaker’s decision to expel the AUF Elected Member and Leader of Opposition, Hon Evans McNiel Rogers from the Anguilla House of Assembly on Monday, April 23, 2012. 

I was rather surprised when I heard that the airwaves in Anguilla were inundated by the comments and calls to a number of AUM talk shows regarding our party’s visit to St Martin. I would have thought that for a group that was very active during the tenure of the past administration on the same programs and on similar forums this would have been considered a normal situation. As far as I can recall the present Chief Minister was constantly on the airwaves and would call a public meeting “at the drop of a hat”. But what surprised me even more was that at the town hall meetings in St Martin there were at least two persons who suggested that they were told that our party was keeping meetings constantly and not allowing the Government to do its work. Of course we were able to convincingly put such statements to rest by pointing out that the present Government and its supporters since ascending to office have had many more meetings than we have had; were on the talk shows several days a week and several times more often than members of our party; and they organized at least four public demonstrations on their own Government while we have not had even one. 

The bothersome aspect of these comments is the realization that some of the persons who spout such nonsense about the AUF keeping meetings in St. Martin, genuinely believe that they are right in their criticism. One AUM supporter called up the Radio Station advising that while they were on the air talking they needed to be aware that the AUF is campaigning because they know that an election is around the corner. This indicates that there is a strong belief among supporters of the AUM that our party is in a conspiracy that affords us information on the timing of the next election. The truth of the matter is that in our system of Government based on our constitution and in keeping with the Westminster model only the Government and specifically the Chief Minister can say with any certainty when the next election is to be called. Unless of course, after five years have elapsed or things have broken down to the extent that there is an extremely unstable situation on the island. Even in such times the Governor according to section 63 (2) of the Constitution must consult with the Chief Minister. It therefore behooves the opposition parties to be always in a state of readiness. This includes keeping in touch with all groups who are a part of the electoral process, wherever they reside. In terms of our situation it is as important to keep our supporters in St. Martin in the know, as much as our supporters in West End or Island Harbour. This has nothing to do with the timing of elections this is about touching base. Obviously, the spin-doctors within the AUM continue to perpetrate the falsehood that the Governor is planning to bring down the Government by sowing the notion that the AUF is a part of such a conspiracy. While in fact we were simply fulfilling a campaign promise that we would visit those jurisdictions where we had solicited support during that period. In case the AUM would like to know St. Thomas will be our next stop! 

While our Constitution provides that the term of office of the duly elected Government is five years, it also gives the Chief Minister the power to ask the Governor to dissolve the House and call for General elections when he so wishes. No Governor has ever in the history of the Overseas Territories refused a request from a Chief Minister to dissolve the House of Assembly. And it is only in circumstances when law and order has broken down that a Governor would initiate such an action. Why then are AUM supporters so frantic every time it appears that the AUF is using its right as a political party and as a responsible opposition to discuss issues of national importance on the various media? Why is it that they feel that it is alright --- and do not protest when the Chief Minister is abroad waging his propaganda campaign against the Governor and his other political opponents in both the regional and international press. Do they not recognize a glaring double standard here? 

As I have said time and time again it is apparent that the AUM is bent on silencing the Opposition in and out of the House of Assembly with the same illogical argument, namely, that when we exercise our right to communicate with our constituents at home and abroad we are preventing the Government from functioning. One commentator, who is an AUM sympathizer, at our meeting in French St. Martin intimated that this was the first time Anguilla has been so polarized and divided --- by veiled implication he was clearly suggesting that it was the AUF’s fault because we were too much in a campaign mode. Again we had to point out very clearly that the AUF is not responsible for the division and disunity in Anguilla at this time and in fact the Government itself is divided. Their own Ministers are at odds with each other --- to the extent that they could not get together to support a vital Bill to enhance the Education System. That Bill was drafted in Anguilla and has already been adopted and passed as model legislation in the other islands of the OECS. When will supporters of the AUM stop looking at the Opposition and focus on what they have to do rather than making excuses to justify their cluelessness and lack of ideas. 

But this obsession with silencing the Opposition seems to be even at the highest levels including the Speaker of the House of Assembly. Her decision to expel the Leader of the Opposition from the House for conduct that did not appear to rise to the level of being “grossly disorderly” as set out in Section 48 of the Rules of Procedure, comes under serious scrutiny. I have listened very carefully to the tapes and it is apparent that Mr. Rogers had already completed his presentation and comments when the exchange between himself and Speaker took place. The Leader of the Opposition’s statement was directed at the Leader of Government Business based on the fact that Members of the House were delayed for over an hour without a stated reason, while some members of the Government side of the House were in private session in the conference room. He pointed out that this was a pattern of behaviour that the Government seemed to practice frequently and which he considered extremely disrespectful. Mr. Rogers then took his seat. 

In normal circumstances one would have expected the Chief Minister to rise and either make an apology or attack the member for his comments. But for reasons that were not apparent the Speaker decided to engage the Leader of the Opposition on a matter that was obviously closed. Mr. Rogers did not place any direct blame on the Speaker. On the contrary he had berated the Chief Minister for not effectively managing the agenda for that meeting as well as for some previous meetings. What ensued will remain a puzzlement to many persons who were listening to the House of Assembly. First of all the Speaker allowed the Leader of the Opposition to explain why he made the comment then in the midst of his explanation decided to shut him up and demand that he take his seat. Mr. Roger’s response was defiant or perhaps indignant having been denied the opportunity to state the reason for his dissatisfaction for what was clearly an annoying delay of the proceedings of the House. To fast forward, there is obviously much validity to the comments of the Leader of the Opposition because after he left the Elected Member for East End also expressed similar concerns over the frequent delays. 

Don’t get me wrong I am not disputing the authority of the Speaker to manage the House of Assembly, but her role is to achieve the exact opposite of what her actions to date have demonstrated. Her role is to facilitate fair debate in the House of Assembly on issues of national importance. An important aspect of that responsibility is to ensure that the views of the minority or the Opposition receive equitable expression. It is not about her it is about the business of the House --- the people’s business. Obviously, on this occasion this was not a situation where the Government and the Opposition were at odds --- it appears, however, that the Speaker was on the defensive regarding her management of the House. And she did not seem willing to entertain any objections from the Opposition on delays that persons from both sides of the House found to be unsatisfactory. 

A certain level of arrogance may be detected in the manner in which the Speaker dealt with this issue. She could have easily accepted the member’s comments as warranted, given the long delay, and moved on to the next contribution to the motion. However, she chose to act as if there were no grounds for the concerns but stood ready to suppress the member’s right to explain the reasons for objecting to what he described as disrespectful behaviour. Based on this and previous rulings by the Speaker it could appear that she is more concerned with fighting off threats to her authority than ensuring that the democratic process is upheld in the House of Assembly. Does she really understand that it is her job to make create an environment in the House for equitable participation in the debate rather than to show off her ability to push elected members of the Opposition around? 

It is against such attitudes that seem to embrace the notion that “democracy and freedom of expression” is reserved for supporters of the AUM Government --- that we take serious objection. The Anguilla United Front will never surrender those inalienable rights to the vacuous rants of AUM supporters caught up in this “herd mentality” --- swept up in a stampede, perhaps inadvertently trampling under foot the very principles they claim to espouse.

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

“LEADERSHIP AND TRUTH”

Mr. Victor F. Banks - Leader of the Anguilla United Front

Let me take this opportunity to congratulate the members of the New Testament Church of God for the exceptional display of support and respect they showed for their Leader, Pastor Bernard C. Joseph as he celebrated his Fiftieth Birthday at their Church at Chandeliers last Sunday, April 15, 2012. Looks can be deceiving. But it was evident, from the nature of the celebration, that Pastor Joseph is loved, by his entire congregation because of his service and Ministry. Pastor Joseph was showered with praises, tributes and gifts. But to “crown it all” he was lifted up with a most stirring sermon from young and animated Bro. Daniel Rogers of South Hill. The entire event was a real surprise for the young Pastor and his wife Linda who were frequently overwhelmed with tears of joy as the afternoon unfolded. It was both emotional and inspirational for all who were in attendance. And it demonstrated that there are still many people who understand the importance of displaying gratitude rather than taking their blessings for granted.

As I sat in the sanctuary I could not help but reflect on the tendency in Anguilla to gravitate towards negative information and gossip rather than facts and things that are praiseworthy. Why is it that some Anguillians seem so anxious to speak ill of others simply because they perceive that doing so will advance their own interests? Why is it that some Anguillians do not really care if the whole country suffers once they can destroy someone who they dislike or oppose? Why is it that some Anguillians prefer to listen to irresponsible rhetoric on a Talk Show than to read the actual facts for themselves in a book, document or newspaper? These and other questions came to mind as the positive messages in the presentations rang through in song; dance; skits; and the spoken word! The emphasis was on adoration; good leadership; good works and thanksgiving. But the source was always the written word! The truth as recorded in the Bible! I believe that Pastor Joseph’s accolades are well deserved having succeeded in fifteen years to build a fellowship of believers who understand and appreciate his leadership. Congratulations are certainly in order.

This brings me to my topic of discussion this week, namely, leadership and truth. For more than two years the people of Anguilla have been listening to a message of lies and deception that has been perpetrated by a leader who usurped power by empty promises; false hopes; and character assassination. We were promised that as the “self-proclaimed champion of the voiceless” in our society, he would look out for the interests of all the people of Anguilla, in particular the working class and the smaller entrepreneurs. The mantra of his campaign was that the past Government would tax Anguillians out of existence and he would ensure that there would be no new taxes. His exact words: “I would never support taxing a dead economy”. To “crown it all” he said that Anguillians need not worry --- he would turn the economy around in a short time because he had a plan that he would only reveal after elections.

Unfortunately, a number of Anguillians seem to have embraced this “invisible plan”. Unlike the leader we described earlier that denounces the power of the devil to destroy or obstruct his plans for his congregation --- this leader create his own “demons”, namely, the Governor, the British and the past AUF Government who he claims have the power to destroy and obstruct the fulfilment of his plans for the people of Anguilla. And even further he claims that he is helpless to prevent them! In other words, he is acting like a leader without faith in his own ability and without knowledge of his own strength.

On the issue of truth and honesty --- rather than take responsibility for his actions and the actions of his Government this Leader claims that the tax measures we face are not his and he has no way of amending them. If the Anguilla Constitution can be considered, at the risk of being heretical, our “Bible” of Governance then our Leader is a “false prophet” because he is not truthful in the statements that he preaches. The Anguilla Constitution places the power to enact; implement; amend; and appeal legislation squarely in the hands of the elected government of which he is the “Leader”. To quote: Section 47 of the Anguilla Constitution, it 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.

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.

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 misled 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.

Returning to my analogy of the Anguilla Constitution as our “Bible” of Governance I believe that I have established the point that the Chief Minister is a “false prophet” and secondly that he is acting as if he has no faith or knowledge of his own capability. Is this the truth or is this a contrivance to compensate for his inability to deliver on his promises to the people of Anguilla? At this juncture the answer to that question is of no consequence. It appears that the people of Anguilla have already come to realize that things are falling apart. There is no good news from most of the most important projects on Anguilla and by his own admission the Chief Minister said in the last House of Assembly meeting that “Anguilla is in crisis”. The Anguilla Chamber of Commerce is lamenting the tendency to continue to tax the economy rather than create conditions for growth and expansion in the business sector. And Anguillians from all walks of life are facing financial hardships. It is time for leadership and truth in Governance rather than lies and excuses.

For the past fifteen months at least, the Anguilla United Front (AUF) in various media (print and broadcast) and on several platforms and forums have been addressing the issues related to the Government’s Interim Stabilization Levy (The Levy). We have dubbed it a “bad tax” and have remained firm in our conviction that it should be repealed. We conducted petition exercises, but despite the fact that many Anguillians expressed outrage few of them believed us that they would be directly affected. In the early period of our campaign against the Levy we were able to force some amendments from Government, for example, a floor of two thousand dollars; the removal of the tax on service charge; a higher ceiling at the top; and more public consultations. Nevertheless, the tax was imposed, with the Chief Minister all the while claiming that it is not his tax --- it is a British tax. 

Mr. Fritz Smith - Chairman of the
Anguilla United Front 

Late last year a number of persons and groups in the community (including the Churches) came to the rude awakening that they were in breach of the regulations governing the filing of returns under the Levy Ordinance and were therefore liable to penalties as high as seventeen thousand dollars. These solid citizens anxious not to run afoul of the law, ran in and took advantage of an extended “grace period” and paid ten percent of the assessed penalties without consideration of the validity of that clause of the Act. Our party still aggrieved at the unfairness of the Act declared that notwithstanding the fact that persons had complied with the reduced penalties we would consider filing a class action against the Government for the unfair penalties being imposed. Accordingly, the Chairman of our Party, Mr. Fritz Smith and others, having been served notice by the Inland Revenue Department that they would be charged late filing fees on earnings below the statutory minimum, secured legal counsel, who after the relevant legal arguments made the following statement to the Comptroller: “Our client is of the view, and is fortified by law, that this Section 10 of the Act is unconstitutional and invalid. Accordingly, our client is seeking the reversal of any penalties on his account within your department. We look forward to your response to the matters contained herein, particularly:- 1.) To confirm that our client’s charges on account will be reversed. 2.) The actions you intend to take with respect to repealing all unconstitutional and invalid sections of the Act.”

The good news is that Mr. Smith and the other complainants have received similar letters from the Inland Revenue Department as follows: “As instructed by the Attorney General’s Chambers, the late filing penalties in the amount of EC$2,000.00 have been expunged from your client’s account. A refund is being processed for the said amount and your Chambers will be notified when it is completed. Yours Sincerely.”

Obviously, there are many other persons who have behaved like good citizens and simply accepted the penalties imposed by the Inland Revenue Department. They too are eligible for similar refunds under the law. But the purpose of my column is not to cause the Government to repay needed funds that have already been collected but simply to point out that the Levy continues to be a “bad law” which if not properly amended should be repealed. And furthermore that it was and still is within the competence of Chief Minister and his Government to do so.

If the AUF Chairman had not taken the initiative to enjoin other affected taxpayers along with himself, to contest the unfair penalties meted out to them --- this matter would not have been exposed and the Chief Minister and his colleagues would have continued in the lie that only the Governor can fix it! Well! The AUF Chairman caused it to be fixed --- and he is not even elected. And Mr. Chief Minister, up to now we have not organized a march on the Governor’s Office to achieve this. It only goes to show that Good Governance is not a Parade! It is about Leadership and Truth!

By: Victor F. Banks

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

THE AUM's STABLE-LIE-SENSATION IS CRIPPLING ANGUILLA, according to Chairman...

STABILISATION LEVY MADNESS CONTINUES. 

Persons not filing a zero return or filing late are being asked to pay late fees. Silly isnt it?

Mr. Fritz Smith, Chairman of the Anguilla
United Front Party

The Interim Stabilisation Levy ACT at Section 9 (1) states “every employer who is required to make levy deductions from the remuneration of his employees under Section 5 shall, not later than 10 days after the end of each month – (a) file a return”.

One would like to think that this section is ONLY applicable to the self-employed that make over $2000 for the month. No one should be charged late fees if they haven’t made an income of over the $2000 for the month. ZERO FROM ZERO LEAVES NOTHING, that is 0 - 0 = 0.

Well that section of the law (Section 9 (1)) under which The Government of Anguilla claimed they were acting in accordance with to charge persons late fees for non-filing or late filing of a Zero Balance, was challenged. This challenge has been upheld.

As such, all outstanding amounts for late filing penalties will have to be removed from persons' accounts. Likewise it is believed that all persons who were charged and paid for late filing fees under the same circumstances will have to be refunded the monies they paid.

All affected person should contact the Department of Inland Revenue for Clarity on this. 

REPEAL THE ACT, ITS A BAD, UNFAIR AND INEQUITABLE TAX

By: Fritz Smith

ANGUILLA SUMMER FESTIVAL STARTS WITH A BANG!!!

ANGUILLA FESTIVAL COORDINATOR - PRESS RELEASE

Mr. Vanier Harrigan - Anguilla Festival Coordinator

Discussions were held with Mr. Eddy Baird and members of his office with respect to changes that needed to be made before I would continue as chairman of the carnival committee. There were several difficulties I faced in my role as Chairman.  In the year 2010, when I took over Anguilla Summer Festival, the committee’s financial state was one of a negative balance of close to EC$300,000.00. This means that the committee was indebted to the tune of that amount. I was given a budget of EC$800,000.00, down from the previous years’ average budget of about EC$1.3 million. Given the existing liabilities, I had to make difficult choices regarding cutting some of the events as well as combining events.

This year I was asked by the Minister of Culture to cut yet another free Carnival event, this time either the Caribbean Beach Party, or Parade of Troupes. I felt it would be unfair to the Anguillan community to cut the Parade of Troupes.  Firstly, it is one of the oldest and most well loved events, maybe due to its family oriented nature, which leads to my second reason for regarding the removal of this event as unfair. It is the only real family oriented event within the Summer Festival. Thirdly, many persons who wouldn't attend events at the carnival village, typically attend this event given it is held in an open environment, can be viewed over a period time from different locations and provides enjoyment of music in cheery and relaxed setting.  And finally, the Parade of Troupes is an even that embodies the essence of Carnival. The parade of costumes is an integral part of carnival wherever held in the world.  To remove this event from our Summer Festival would be a detriment to it.

On the other hand, the Caribbean Beach Party is something that has grown to be a world-class event that attracts people from all over the world and has become a selling point of our carnival.  Not to mention the fact that the Anguillan Community is very fond of it.  The removal of either of these events was an impossible decision to make.

Furthermore, my policy as Chairman was to hire as much local contractors as possible, such as JTR security and Gaff of Platinum Sounds, so as to keep jobs here in Anguilla. In 2010 and 2011 when I decided to use an Anguillan owned and based security firm to team up with our Anguilla Royal Police Force, I received opposition from many of my other committee members. I paired JTR security with a technical person who had the experience of dealing with riots who could assist them with understanding the scope of the security task that had to be undertaken, such as crowd control. By virtue of this pairing, coupled with my experience working with as a US Federal Agent, I knew that our locals could get the job done provided they had the right protocols and tools to work with.  It proved to be successful initiative and a wise decision given that almost no arrests were made during that time and the summer festivals occurred virtually incident free.  The vision of empowering our people to allow them to perform is the beginning of a better Carnival.

Hon. Minister of Social Development - Mr. Eddison Baird

Another issue that I had, which I discussed with the Minister of Culture, was the way the committees’ finances were handled. One long serving member referred to as the finance controller handles the finances. This member is responsible for the funds collected at the gates, government and sponsored funds. There was no requirement of accountability attached to this position, and I as Chairman or other members of the committee never received an accounting of the funds. A report comes out sometime during the next year highlighting the income generated and expenses, but I believe that as Chairman of the Committee holding full responsibility for the events that some sort of financial accountability should be implemented during the Summer Festival.

I have noticed that payment of vendors and contractors is done on preference basis. I found it very unfair that in the past; the contracted security team out of St. Maarten who charged US$84,000.00 was paid fifty percent (50%) up front and most times balance before leaving Anguilla. Their housing and meals were also provided for.  The same payment method of a smaller amount applied to the sound systems crew. However, our own local security firm who charged the Committee less than half the price of the St. Maarten security firm, and had no housing costs included, have yet to be paid.  This same unfortunate state of affairs applies to our local sound system firm. Is it that we want our own people to fail or under perform?  I must say I am very proud of Gilbert Fleming (Gaff) and Frankie Rogers (JTR Security) for spending monies out of pocket and working hard to make carnival a success. If these guys were treated with the same courtesy as the outside contractors, they would be able to perform better.

Festival Coordinator and the Hon. Minister of Social Development
parading the Miss Caraibes Queens

Some members of our Government have yet to recognize the importance of carnival.  It is detrimental to Anguilla when we chose not to enhance our summer festival as a tourist and an economical product. Our Minister of Social Development does not see it fit or important to enhance on our social life style for our citizens, young people and tourist. The need to create and improve what we have out grown, such as a proper cultural center to host events and programs, is long overdue. I find government focuses more on Anguilla as a rich and famous beach destination, without realizing the fact that younger tourists now constitute the majority of travellers. When they visit here there is nothing exciting and cultural to do, or any social event to attend.  Carnival is one of the biggest incentives as a middle-income tourist attraction. From middle-income tourism benefits accrue to the local businesses, revenue is generated by government taxes, and jobs are created. Carnival Tourism is the next big thing within Europe, North America and the Caribbean. We should not be focused on the carnival committee and government making back money spent on carnivals, but rather focus on generating activity for the survival of local businesses, which carnivals contributes to in a significant way. When our government ministers say they are in the church and want nothing to do with carnival, it is like saying you don't care about our country's culture, a culture that has been around for hundreds of years. It also appears that you don't care about the survival of our local economy. It is the government’s job to find every creative way to stimulate business to ensure the survival of our people and businesses.

Another benefit of carnival is the exposure of our talent that we have in abundance in Anguilla. The unique thing about Anguilla is that our young people are very interested in music and it is a fact that we have more bands in Anguilla per capita than anywhere else in the Caribbean. There is a saying that 'the devil finds work for idle hands to do’, If we don't see the need to invest heavily in our culture, we will spend more down the road fighting crime and doing damage control. Crime can destroy our tourist product that we’re trying to build. It’s seems our Tourism Department and Social Department do not recognize the value of developing our cultural events and building facilities to house them, then we have no vision for the next generation. These two agencies must work together and create a prosperous social environment for our tourists and local population.

Mr. Davon Carty

I would like to end by congratulating our new chairman of the Anguilla Summer Festival, Mr. Davon Carty, and wish him all the best in a very difficult, thankless job. I yet await a thank you, and to be informed by Mr. Eddie Baird of my replacement for 2012.  I would also like to state that I stand by my principles and what I believe is right, and I will voice my opinion as I see it fit.

By: J. Vanier Harrigan

Anguilla Festival Coordinator – 2010-2011

POLITICAL IGNORANCE AND INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY

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

Recently there is a lot of talk about independence for Anguilla. The right to self determination is something every human being has a right to strive for individually or as a social group. Anguillians at this point are not ready because nothing has been done over the years to prepare them. 

Independence can be achieved in two ways, one in terms of preparatory 5 to 10 year period. The other as an immediate shock treatment. The latter will only be successful with leaders that have vision, understanding and integrity.

At present Anguillians in general are little more than transplanted Africans in a mental rot refusing to leave behind the belief that slavery entitles us to somehting. We cannot forever remain African with a European Language and name, ruled by European Governor and Queen while we worship a European Jesus/God and teach our children to believe in a European Santa. Breaking with the past is not only about replacing the political system, its also about thinking for ourselves.

In order to move forward Anguillians must cast in the garbage bin of history, all forms of political ignorance, dishonesty and corruption. We must also be weary of those who say we are willing to support you if you agree to a time table but they refuse to set a time. They refuse to formulate tangible objectives. Their only selling point is to say we will do better than the other guy irrespective of what we did in the past. Ignorance in a society spells disaster but arrogrance offers a similar path to destruction.

Today its easy to divide Anguilla into those who are willing to die for the beilef that common sense is more important than education and those willing to die like bugs around an educated light. We have one group of leaders that seem willing to capitalize on ignorance using religion and other forms of emotional appeals and others who despite their high level of education, refuse to think, refuse to be intellectually honest. Intellectual dishonesty is killing the economy as much as the lack of an understanding of the functioning of the global system.

In 2012 for one group of leaders to call for independence simply because they cannot ignore  colonial arrogrance or even use it to our advantage is as destructive as the next group that is wagged by its tail saying that since the British wont agree to full Internal Self Government so its a waste of time to ask, you are the waste of time, the British can only refuse because its not a national consensus. They know they can depend on you to oppose when you are on the outside and not ask when you are on the inside. History shows that the British like every other European power dont give anything to those who refuse to demand it.

The facts are simple. It was stupid to promise that you could have fixed the economy in a month without an understanding of the problems at hand. It was stupid for the people to believe it could have been done. It is also intellectually dishonest to tell the people that the fix is to put you in office because so you can continue with business as usual when its obvious that not only has your policy failed but your entire economic paradigm of development is flawed. We cannot continue with business as usual because there is no more business as usual, the entire western capitalist system is under review. Intellectuals? if they deserve the title you should be searching for models of development that will allow small islands to survive in the coming period where everything as we know it will be scarce.

By: Statchel Warner

"FACE THE FACTS!"

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

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

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

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

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

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

By: Statchel Warner

“KUNTA KINTE COME FORWARD!”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By: Victor F. Banks

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

“TRY A LITTLE KINDNESS”

Mr. Victor F. Banks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By: Victor F. Banks

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

“I REST MY CASE”

Mr. Victor F. Banks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By: Victor F. Banks

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

ANGUILLA'S CONSTITUTIONAL ILLUSIONS AND ANCHORING TRUTHS CONTINUE...

Letter to Rev. Dr. H. Clifton Niles

Mr. Fritz Smith - Chairman of the 

Anguilla United Front (AUF)

Rev. Dr. H. Clifton Niles

Chairman

The Constitutional and Electoral Reform Committee

South Hill

Dear Dr Niles,

We are in possession of and have read the various provisions of the draft constitution which are in the process of being prepared as a result of the deliberations of the constitutional committee to date. Having read and discussed the said provisions, the Anguilla United Front Party (“the AUF”) is through this medium informing you that we have disassociated ourselves from this process and, our representative on the committee will not play any further role in the exercise, going forward. We have made this decision for the following reasons:

1. The draft provisions clearly indicate that the committee has deliberately ignored the current realities of the environment in which this exercise is taking place and are putting forward a document with the same amendments which the UK Government has already rejected for our sister Caribbean Overseas Territories as recent as eighteen (18) months ago. Every single UK Overseas Territory including Bermuda and the Cayman Islands have recognized and have accepted that the boundaries have been clearly established for the exercise of internal self-government. In this context, the present UK Coalition Government has made it clear in all of its position papers on the issue of full internal self-government that “the UK will not agree to a constitutional arrangement where we retain responsibilities without the necessary means to discharge them”. This is an exact quote from Mr. Simon Fraser, the FCO Permanent Under-Secretary at Government House, Old Ta, Anguilla on November 3, 2011. Based on this unambiguous statement by Mr Fraser, it is foreseeable that any constitution based on full internal self-government (and specifically any amendments which effectively reduce the powers of the Governor) at this point in time is likely not to be accepted by the UK Government. Our representative on your committee has indicated this view to you and other committee members in the past.

2. In recent statements Chief Minister Hughes has said that the committee is mandated to prepare a constitution geared to full internal self-government. While the AUF remains in favour of this option and in fact had discussions with the late Dame Bernice Lake on crafting a constitution to achieve this arrangement, given these clear boundaries set by the UK Government we believe that presenting such a document would be unnecessarily confrontational. The experience of the other Overseas Territories confirm this assessment. Further, the change in the UK Government in 2010 and the expressed position of the new coalition government in the UK clearly indicate that this is now not an option to which the UK Government will agree. 

3. The AUF believes that, based on the utterances of the Members of Government and more so of the Chief Minister, a rejection of the draft constitution based on full internal self-government by the UK Government, will lead to the usual and unnecessary confrontation between the Chief Minister and his colleagues and the UK Government. In addressing the issue of independence Mr Fraser has stated, “As we have often said, the British Government fully supports the principle of self-determination. Where independence is an option, as it is for Anguilla, and is the clearly and constitutionally expressed wish of the majority of the people of the Territory, the British Government will give every help to that Territory to achieve it”. Therefore, there need not be any tension with the UK Government in relation to independence.

4. It is therefore clear to us that, inasmuch as full internal self-government is no longer an option at this point in time, there are two (2) other real options available to Anguilla and Anguillians, 

(i) enhancing/improving our existing relationship with the UK as a British Overseas Territory; or 

(ii) deciding on the issue of independence.

If Anguillians choose to enhance/improve the existing relationship with the UK, then a revision of the Anguilla Constitution in the manner being currently drafted by the Committee becomes irrelevant. If, however, Anguillians choose to go independent (as evidenced by way of a referendum), then a new “independent” constitution will have to be prepared and taken to the people of Anguilla.

5. The current financial and fiscal condition of the country and the forecast for the near future must also be taken into account. In these times, the focus should be on restoring economic stability to Anguilla and doing so void of any controversy with the UK government over a draft constitution and independence for Anguilla. Such controversy could only serve to further destabilise our economy and damage our tourism product and investment opportunities, all of which have direct negative implications for our people.

Rev. Dr. H. Clifton Niles – Chairman of 

the Anguilla Constitutional and Electoral 

Reform Committee 

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

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

Please also be advised that our representative on the Committee has not accepted compensation for her appointment to the Committee. We would like suggest that said compensation be used for another worthy cause in Anguilla, such as the Anguilla Literary and Debating Society, which is now hosting the 40th Anniversary of the Leeward Islands Debating Competition.Yours sincerely

Mr. Fritz Smith - Chairman - Anguilla United Front (AUF) 

Cc. 
Honourable Chief Minister - Mr Hubert Hughes,

Honourable Minister of Home Affairs - Mr Walcott Richardson,

Honourable Minister of Social Development - Mr Edison Baird,

Honourable Minister of Infrastructure - Mr Evan Gumbs,

The Press