If a movie was to be written about politics in Anguilla, it would probably win an Oscar for best dramatic comedy. Unfortunately, there is nothing funny about the reality of politics in Anguilla. It features various characters cast in different roles; some veterans on the political stage, some new comers and others eager to get on to the stage. Whatever their role, each character seeks to give an award winning performance – posturing to win public support – so they can be nominated for the next theatrical event.
I often wonder if they even realize that this isn’t about them and about who looks best on the big screen. This is about the future of Anguilla. It seems like we, the people, have been forgotten in all of this. Rather than being on a path to socio-economic development, it seems we are headed for the Oscars. It is therefore no exaggeration when I say that the opposition motion in the House of Assembly on Wednesday 20th November has turned into a motion picture.
It all started when the Leader of the Opposition sought to have some opposition motions heard ahead of Government business; probably a strategic move, to ensure that the motions were heard. However, since there is no rule that specifically addresses the matter, the Speaker chose to exercise her discretion to hear the Government business first. And that is when, as the old people would say “all hell broke loose”. The end result: opposition members left the Assembly which resulted in there being no quorum.
Given what transpired in the previous sitting when the Fiscal Framework legislation was passed in the absence of a quorum, the Honourable Deputy Speaker rose and objected to the proceedings continuing. He must be applauded for his act of bravery, because it could not have been an easy stand to take. I view it as a stand for democracy. While we now know that the business of the house can continue without a quorum, such a practice is inherently undemocratic and ought not to be encouraged. The members of the House were elected by the people to serve the people and when decisions are being made for the people, we the people must be satisfied that our interests were adequately represented before those decisions were made. That is democracy and we ought not to let it be eroded by undesirable practices. Apart from the stance taken by the Deputy Speaker, I’m afraid there isn’t much else to applaud from this particular scene or those following.
The next scene involved the appearance of several persons on the radio programme “Talk Anguilla” with Keithstone Greaves. Obviously upset, members of the Government side of the house took the opportunity to “lambase” the members of the Opposition and the Deputy Speaker about the walk out. Based on their comments, they appear to be alleging that what had transpired was orchestrated by the Opposition members in collusion with the Deputy Speaker. Apart from entertainment, there was nothing useful to the people of Anguilla about their tirade. Nor was there anything useful to us from the appearance of opposition members, and others aspiring to political office, on radio shows and television to discuss the walk-out. There was nothing said, that could possibly assist in advancing Anguilla, which I believe should be the purpose of being in political office. However, we seem to be stuck in a period of political immaturity. I cannot understand why as representatives of the people, our politicians cannot sit around a table and trash out their differences. Why must all their garbage be put on display before the general public?
This brings me to the following scene: “He Say, She Say”. The exchange of letters between the Opposition members and the Speaker in which they all outlined their position in unequivocal terms put another twist on this already unfortunate but captivating plot. Again this war of words played out before the general public. The Speaker was right about one thing: the Opposition members should have spoken to her first rather than making their letter public. However, based on my information to date, she allegedly turned around and did the exact same thing. I wonder whether in her position as Speaker that is something she should have done. It appears she allowed herself to be drawn into the fray. Maybe it would have been more prudent for her to address the matter at the next sitting of the Assembly. Anyway, as it stands, the exchange of words is on record for public hearing and viewing.
Has it occurred to any of the members of the Assembly how hypocritical they are? As adults, especially community leaders, we often say that our young people should learn to get along, stop fighting, put down the guns. Have we ever stopped to think that they are emulating our behaviour? Have our politicians demonstrated how to disagree amicably? How to settle differences internally without disrespecting each other? The war of words in the public domain should be the last resort, used only when all other avenues of dialogue have failed to bring about a desirable result. Even then, disrespect is never to be tolerated. However, it often seems that the first line of dealing with a problem is immediate combat, which is just the thing we tell our young people not to do. The Assembly ought to be leading by example.
Like any good drama, the end remains a mystery. Upcoming on the agenda of the House shortly, will be the 2014 budget. Will the House be sufficiently constituted for its business to continue? Will anyone raise an objection? This is left to be seen. Members of the House of Assembly however, should always remain conscious that their actions have implications for Anguilla generally. Their focus should not be single-mindedly on gaining points for the next election, but doing the business of the people. They were not called to be self-serving but to serve others. This should be their priority.
