Dear Mr. Editor
I would like through this medium to thank the ALHCS Debating Society for their organization and delivery of the recently concluded series of political debates in the lead up to the next general election. Whilst the questions could have had more depth and been geared to a number of pressing issues in Anguilla, I suspect that, given the time constraints, this might not have done the candidates justice given the fact that they would not have been adequately prepared to go into detail. This could perhaps be addressed by another organizing committee in a different format. However, the candidates must also be commended for their participation.
It would appear that some of the candidates operated in a manner of dignity fitting for the young organizers, but it was quite obvious that a couple of the candidates obviously could not resist the stage to be like attack dogs. Perhaps they should have been briefed on dignified behavior of persons who wish to hold leadership positions. The AUM candidates were relatively tame and seemed in the latter debates to be more prepared. This was even more evident during the Leader’s debate when Mr. Webster quite early in the debate confidently stated that a particular question would come later in the debate.
The AUF candidates equipped themselves admirably, given the fact that the party seems to be the only opposition, as this could have been the only conclusion drawn from the Leader’s debate where both the AUM and DOVE leaders attacked the AUF leader on everything. The three DOVE Party candidates were varied in their individual approaches. Notably, Rev. Niles was very dignified with some persons claiming that he should be the party leader. As for the independent candidates, Statchel Warner was the attack dog and operated like he had nothing to lose.
During the leaders debate the leader of the DOVE Party, Mr. Hodge, was in a fighting mood from the start (definitely not like a dove). I am not sure that this type of attitude has gotten Anguilla anywhere in our recent history. Nonetheless, it is obvious that he is naturally condescending and elitist in his approach. He was the only candidate to attack the audience and make negative references to supporters of the other parties.
I trust that the ALHCS Debating Society will continue to organize future debates for other elections and that the review and constantly seek to be progressive in their approach.
Congratulations once again to the Principal and Staff and the Debating Society for taking the lead in such a manner.
(Name withheld at writer’s request.)
