“Today, I would like to congratulate the Governments of Sudan and South Sudan, but also to challenge and encourage them to continue on the road to peace that your people deserve, and continue to build on the hard-won progress you have made so far. It is in both countries’ interests to establish a peaceful, prosperous and mutually beneficial relationship. The UK stands ready to assist you.”
The foregoing is the last paragraph of an intervention made by the Hon. Mark Simmonds, Minister for theOverseasTerritorieswho visited us last week in that capacity. He was at the time speaking at the High Level Consultative Forum forSudanand South Sudan in his capacity Minister forAfrica. Minister Simmonds, in addition to those two portfolios is also Minister for: – Conflict Issues; Climate Change; International Energy; Consular Affairs; Protocol; The Caribbean (not including Haiti, the Dominican Republic and Cuba); and Ministerial Oversight for FCO Services. Minister Simmonds is only one of seven Ministers serving with the Foreign Secretary, Hon. William Hague, Minister for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
So in a senseAnguillais only one part, of one of the portfolios, of one of the seven Ministers serving in the FCO Ministry, which is one of the several Ministries in the British Government. And Minister Simmonds, our O. T. Minister must pay attention to all the other portfolios in his Ministry and report to and consult with the Foreign Secretary’s Office on all the areas for which he is responsible.
LikeAnguilla,Sudanis only a small part of Minister Simmonds’Africaportfolio. So in effect, as Anguilla is to theOverseasTerritories, so isSudanto the countries ofAfrica. Of course they share a population of some forty two million as opposed to our fifteen thousand. But whereasSudanand Southern Sudan are two formerly unified countries in the midst of civil wars and border disputes, the only battleAnguillaseems to be waging at present is the “war on the flies” which are invading homes all over the island from the Corito Landfill site.
I should also mention that the CM and his Government have not yet acknowledged the existence of this threat to our national health and security even though he continues to talk about the imaginary war with the British on every regional and international forum.
I have been painting the picture that as far as the British Government is concerned, and in the larger scheme of things,Anguillais of no serious or urgent consequence. And furthermore it is my view that they see the Chief Minister ofAnguillaas just another enthusiastic politician having only a nuisance effect on the overall British national agenda.
In this context, I have been moved to comment on the excellent editorial in the Anguillian entitled “Time will tell!” The Anguillian editorial sought to place the current strained relationship between the Chief Minister and the Governor/British Government in a rational framework — and then suggest that with the new Minister there could be an opportunity to forge a “more collaborative and less acrimonious relationship” between theUKandAnguilla. The editorial advises the OT Minister; the Chief Minister and the Governor on the positive steps that each could take to repair the relationship here summarized briefly as follows: –
1) The Minister should a} do the research to better understandAnguillaand Anguillians; b} treat us with respect; and, c} stand up for us in presenting our case to his colleagues.
2) The Chief Minister should a} acknowledge the realities of our current constitutional status; b} act responsibly; and, c} stop assigning blame — take charge – lead.
3) The Governor should a} be a friend ofAnguilla; b} support our Government; and, c} rise above the fray.
I dare to say that the Editorial is both generous and optimistic. And I would be extremely happy if such an environment could be achieved. However, I believe that we may have forgotten the underlying misconceptions that form the basis for the approach of the Chief Minister and his supporters in this relationship. I hinted at them in my narrative above. Let me refresh your memories as follows: –
• The Chief Minister and his supporters believe thatAnguillais a major issue on the FCO agenda.
• The Chief Minister and his supporters have suggested that theUKis part of a conspiracy “to forceAnguillainto suppression”.
• The Chief Minister and his supporters have expressed the view that theUKdoes not want Anguilla to pursueIndependencebecause of the alleged existence of oil resources.
• The Chief Minister believes that it is all about him.
• The Chief Minister seems to believe that he was responsible for the reshuffle of Ministers in the UK Government Cabinet. In other words Minister Bellingham was moved from the FCO because of pressure from him.
I admire the confidence expressed in the editorial that a new Minister; and a new approach from the CM could lead to a partnership of mutual benefit. However, until these false assumptions are relinquished the chance of improving the relationship will continue to be a “pipe-dream”. Indeed, the same beliefs and attitudes are playing out in the announcement of a replacement for Governor Harrison. The fact that the average tenure for a Governor has long passed— does not stand in the way of views to the contrary, namely, that the CM forced him out and therefore we are getting a new Governor. They have even begun to revel in the fact that she is a young woman and consequently no match for Hubert. Again this is further reinforcement of the viewpoint that our relationship with the British must be confrontational so as to work effectively.
Readers should note however, that Ms. Christina Scott who will succeed Governor Harrison is not an isolated appointment. It is one of over forty appointments in consular and ambassadorial positions made throughout the world this year by the FCO Ministry alone. So while she has the distinction of being the first female Governor assigned toAnguillathis is not an earthshaking or alarming incident triggered by pressure from the CM. Neither is it being done in a hurry nor in a manner that could suggest panic or unplanned haste. On the contrary, it is well-planned and scheduled to take place in approximately nine months.
According to the FCO release, “Ms. Scott has had wide ranging civil service career working across a range of domestic and international policies. Currently Director of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat in the Cabinet Office, she previously spent three years as Private Secretary to the Prime Minister. She has also worked at HM Treasury, in the Department for Transport and at the European Commission.” This is quite an impressive resume for a young woman alleged to be less than forty years old.
It seems that the Chief Minister and his supporters are gloating over the prospect that there will be two new British Officials to deal with, in the hierarchy of the FCO, namely, a politician and a diplomat. I certainly hope that this could be so, given the last thirty months of wasted opportunities; hostile conduct; and conspiracy theories. But one thing crossed my mind. What is the AUM’s view of collaboration and cooperation? Does it mean permissiveness on the part of these new officials? Or does it mean mutual respect and understanding? Does it mean the surrender of others at all times? Or does it mean a willingness to find equitable compromises? Will they continue to believe that the rules are for everyone else? Or will they refrain from partisan politics?
One thing is certain. Personalities do not change British policy as it relates its Overseas Territories. It remains consistent over successive Governments, only amended by a fairly transparent consultative process. The new Minister or the new Governor will not represent any substantive adjustments to past policies. And most importantly it would be most wise for the Chief Minister to keep in focus the fact that — despite the difference in appearance — the new tenant at the Governor’s Residence in Old Ta is not just another pretty face!
