Webster defines democracy as a system of government by which the whole population or all the eligible members of a state are governed typically through elected members. Such a government is called a representative government in which the people vote for representatives who decide issues in their name.
But what transpired in the House of Assembly a little over two weeks ago was anything but of, by and for the people. It looked more like government by the few, fresh off the pages of ancient Greece where the oligarchs lived in luxury while the poor had to work. The oligarchs ignored the needs of most of the people. Sounds familiar doesn’t it? Democracy happens when all the stakeholders participate in the legislative process, so when a select few conduct the people’s business in a way that doesn’t pass the smell test, it borders on moronic and irresponsible behavior, the collateral damage of which we’re yet to realize.
Now let’s step back and try to analyze what has happened. The constitution clearly spells out how the people’s business is to be conducted and when that process isn’t followed to the letter, then it’s time to start asking why. Is there more than meets the eye here, or was this just a bunch of country bumpkins acting in the best interests of everyone? At first glance, it might appear that way, but when you start to take another look at this, it in fact smells.
Why would the Chief Minister take this course of action, without a quorum, when he specifically knows the parliamentary procedures? Mr. Hughes and his party knew full well that they shouldn’t have proceeded without a quorum, but yet he chose to go forward and the question again is, why? Two of the most important pieces of legislation that will have long lasting effects on all of us, yet he saw no reason to have these bills debated before a full House. I find that irresponsible to say the least. What it says is that our esteemed CM has now attained the status of “Viceroy” that he can decide to proceed with powers that he wasn’t given and all of this in the presence of the Deputy Governor, Attorney General and Deputy Speaker who, before walking out, sat on their hands.
That the opposition is crying foul, and is seeking redress from the courts might be the only way to remedy this conundrum. I do believe that there is precedent for the opposition going forward and I refer to a case in Montserrat which suggests a way for the Governor to deal with this situation. According to Justice Mitchell, in his piece Beyond Walls, “In 2007 the Government of Montserrat approved in Cabinet an amendment to the Legislators Conditions and Service Act. Justice Mitchell contends that when the bill reached the Committee stage in the Legislature it was not the same bill. However, it was passed as amended. The Montserrat press and the public protested, causing the Chief Minister to back down. (Let’s hear it for public pressure.) The CM invited the Governor to correct the error made by the House by amending the bill “in such a way he feels he can consent to it.” The Governor refused this invitation to follow such an anti-democratic process. He insisted that the CM take back to the Legislature, the necessary amendment to the illegal bill. Justice Mitchell contends that the Governor could have done what the CM suggested. Instead, he signed the bad Act into law together with the later amending act. Justice Mitchell asserts that he did the right thing. He had encouraged the local legislature to pass its own proper laws. While our situation is somewhat different, I’m sure that there is some precedent setting guideline by which our Governor can work from.
Our BOT colonial constitutions all provide that a Governor may send an enacted piece of legislation back to the Legislature if she notices some defect in it, so that the legislature may consider this objection and take such action as members think fit (Mitchell). Common wisdom says that the opposition should have objected and then walk out, so one has to ask the question, does anyone know what the devil they’re doing? The Father of the Nation was correct in his assertion that if you’re going to be a public servant, you need to be well qualified. He goes on: “well qualified persons in terms of education, dedication and integrity and with the right leadership charisma should be selected for public office at the highest level.” I don’t know if this is the Peter Principle at work here, that is, that one has reached his level of incompetence, but whatever it is, it does not serve us well.
Those in government who are in possession of a tertiary education, whom you expect more from, to use a sports metaphor, “dropped the ball.” It’s downright embarrassing to see our legislators tripping over themselves while the rest of us helplessly look on. Once upon a time, we were the butt of every conceivable form of joke, the most famous of which was ‘bobo Johnny.’ I thought those days were long behind us, this, despite the fact that we were the only ones who were and are in possession of the deeds to our own land – that we were the only ones who flew our own airplanes, that we were the only ones who built and sailed our ships up and down the Caribbean sea with ease.
Over forty years ago, a bunch of us got fed up with second class citizenship – and being the butt of everyone’s joke – and through the leadership of some very brave men (I won’t name them, I did that last week) decided that it was time to change the way in which we lived. I don’t have to go into the story. It’s been well told time and time again. On second thought maybe I should, so that those in power, who seem to adopt such a cavalier attitude in looking out for our best interests, will have reason to pause and ask themselves the question, what they would do in this spot.
It is hard to fathom the thinking of our elected representatives and their motives for some of the moves they have made. I mean the Republican House has nothing on these guys. They are diametrically opposed to each other. The Republicans won’t do anything that will make the President of the United States look good and our government can’t seem to do anything right, regardless of how hard they try. That is a sad state of affairs and as my dear old grandmother used to say, before she whipped me, “this is going to hurt me more than it’s going to hurt you” – and I’d say to myself, then don’t do it, but to no avail. We will feel the repercussions from what was done and if we don’t have it hard enough already, what else do we have to look forward to?
We’re in an untenable situation, one of our own making, unforced errors, to use a sports metaphor, that could ultimately cost us the game. Why? Why the irresponsible behavior? Does anyone detect a pattern here? When Mr. Hughes was the leader of the opposition, he was relentless in his pursuit of transparency and good governance. What has happened since he became the leader of the government? Shouldn’t we expect the same relentless pursuit of transparency and good governance now that he’s on the other side?
I really believe that there’s more than meets the eye here. I agree with the letter to the editor in which the writer asserts that what’s legal is not necessarily right. Mr. Banks also weighed in on this issue and he too seemed to think that the Governor and the Attorney General were technically correct in their responses to the situation. Mr. Banks alluded to more pressing and troubling areas, “gaping holes”, in our relationship with both the Exco and the dictatorial style of the CM. Unfortunately, we are the ones who are coming out on the short end. I think that though the opposition dropped the ball, their only recourse maybe is to go to court to seek redress. We are between a rock and a hard place no thanks to our elected representatives. What were they thinking? That everyone in the House recognized right away that they didn’t have a quorum and still decided to proceed in the manner that they did, begs the question, did everyone lose their mind?
What was the rush? The paperwork for the FFR sat languishing on the CM’s desk since March and now all of a sudden, in October, it has to be passed. Did he not know this until the last minute? What’s really going on here, folks? Has the CM gone on radio and explain why the urgency in getting the bill passed? I think if we’re being sold a pig in a poke, we need to know, and while we’re at it, what’s with the bill giving the ECCB unfettered powers to play as they deem necessary with our money?
Last week on the Mayor Show on KOOL FM, Ms. Webster raised some very important issues about the behavior of the government in the House and one can’t help but agree with her assertion that this government has overwhelmingly failed us. We are struggling to feed ourselves – we can’t pay our water, electricity and just about everything else. Nothing is being done to alleviate the untenable situations that we seem to have created for ourselves, but we will rush to the House of Assembly without a quorum and pass legislation that will have dire effects on us over the long haul. Where do the priorities of this government lie? Is it still self-determination, or has that ruse been taken off the agenda? We have not heard a peep about it in recent times. Maybe the CM has seen and heard how the other independent Caribbean nations are having a tough go with it and has decided to cool it.
Whether or not self-determination is still on the table, it would be downright political suicide to start harping on it again so, hopefully, that pipe dream has been laid to rest. What has not been laid to rest is the House situation, so here we go. If it’s not us fighting with the previous governor and the Foreign Office, it’s us fighting among ourselves. This time, it’s over something as simple as following protocol. It smacks of brinksmanship and it makes us, in the eyes of everyone, look like rank amateurs who can’t seem to get anything right. That’s quite a picture that we want to paint for the rest of the world to see. What we do in closed chambers sooner or later will see the light of day and, when it comes out the way it has, again I say it sends the wrong message to the people whom we want to come here and invest their money.
It is time that we elect people with a vision and I’m going a use last week’s quote because I think it’s appropriate. In Proverbs 29:18 it is stated that “Where there is no vision, a people will perish.” Folks a vibrant democracy demands that each and everyone of us get involved. Change will not come about by just asking for it. Start writing to your representative or, better still, show up at his office and let him know that you are struggling and suffering – and you are tired as hell and you won’t tolerate it anymore. Ask him what he intends to do? Remember a while back I quoted a Bahamian member of parliament who said that an elected representative will tremble in his boots when a constitiuent shows up with a member of the press. Well, if that’s what it takes then let’s do it. Let’s also remind them that 2015 is just around the corner and, in the words of the late President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, whom we lost 50 years ago this month, “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” Those words still ring true today as they did some fifty odd years ago. When will we learn? What will we do for our country?
Justice of Appeal Don Mitchell said it best when he said, we catapulted from the 19th century into the 21st century hardly stopping for the 20th century and without much preparation. The result is that Anguilla’s socio-cultural culture is new and unsettled. We’ve not had the time for building conventions and new social structures; consequently we’ve been relegated to a culture similar to that of a “frontier society, unsettled, shifty, brash and unruly.” We are being governed by people who are unqualified and couldn’t find their way out of a paper bag with neon lights flashing saying this way out. We seem to have forgotten the reason why a lot of us put our lives and livelihoods on the line back in ’67. Some of us have done exceptionally well, while others are catching hell. The purpose of our rebellion was to make things better for all, not just the few. Unfortunately, our good intentions seemed to have fallen by the wayside and they’ve been replaced by envy and avarice, a far cry from the original intent of the actions of our forefathers.
Whatever the outcome of the requests of the opposition party, with regard to the assent of the oligarchic tainted bills, all concerned ought to be ashamed of themselves for the way in which the business of the people of Anguilla was conducted. We’ve been at this too long now to be making rookie mistakes like this one, and perhaps the British is as much to blame as our government, for they did very little in the way of teaching us what good governance was supposed to look like. According to Don Mitchell, “we had no formal education and no grounding in the principles of good governance. The British administrators who took charge failed to introduce us to such notions.” Justice Mitchell further states that the outcome was inevitable. Our parents and grandparents had emphasized thrift and self improvement and a career. “We, their children, instead aspire to sell sex, marijuana and cocaine to tourist girls, and bunches of Chinese manufactured trinkets to the old ladies on Shoal Bay Beach.”
We have in place a government who seems to relish ‘an in your face style of governance’ with very little accountability. My grandmother always told me that “hurry dogs eat raw corn.” I now understand what she meant. Time will tell what the long term effects of the actions of the few will be. Let us go forward as one, all pulling in the same direction – and let’s hope that someone has the cojones to stand up for what is right. Until then, may God bless us all and may God bless Anguilla.
