The Banking Bill 2015 is the hot topic in Anguilla these days. You cannot leave your home, turn on the radio or be on social media without being bombarded with some discussion about the Banking Bill. There have been talk shows, public meetings, gatherings in and around the House of Assembly etc, all focused on the Bill. Some key persons consisting mainly of political failures, political hopefuls and major shareholders have been leading the efforts to stir up public emotion and opposition in relation to the legislation. Their efforts have been successful in some quarters despite, or because of, the tardy attempts of the Government to inform persons of the rationale for the decision for Anguilla to remain a member of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union and thus the need to pass the Banking Bill.
Quite frankly, given the option of being regulated by the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank (ECCB) and a British solution, I would easily chose the ECCB as the British Government has made it clear by its actions and inactions that the wellbeing of the people of Anguilla is not its priority. However, I respect the right of our people to voice their concerns in relation to the Bill. That is the right of the people in any democratic society. In fact, I have heard the word “democracy” bandied about quite frequently over the last few weeks. I am left to wonder whether we recognize that with democracy comes responsibility.
The first responsibility is to educate ourselves about the very issue in relation to which we are seeking to exercise our democratic rights. How many of those opposing the Bill have actually read the Bill for themselves, or at least the objects and reasons for the Bill (which are an explanation of the provisions which usually appear at the back of any legislation brought to the House)? Given our culture of not reading, I can almost guarantee that most persons have not read or attempted to read the Bill but are simply being led like blind sheep to oppose or support it. In order for our democratic rights to have value, we need to first seek knowledge and with that, understanding. In the absence of this, we are nothing more than hypocrites, holding strong positions and arguing about issues we know nothing about. Our exercise of democracy appears to be only an exercise in hypocrisy. Based on my observations, I am left to conclude that what is being displayed in Anguilla today is not really democracy, but “democrisy” which is hypocrisy disguised as democracy.
In addition to what has been outlined above, there are several factors which have led me to this conclusion. It is “democrisy” when shareholders are leading the opposition to the Banking Bill to protect their own self-interest and without any apparent regard for the rights of depositors. It is “democrisy” to oppose measures which will result in more stringent regulation of the banking sector, decreased nepotism and increased accountability – when it is the lack of such measures which contributed to the crisis we currently face.
The absence of a firm position from the Leader of the Parliamentary Opposition can also be classified as “democrisy”. The Opposition Leader has said she opposes the passage of the Bill as, in her view, there is a need for further consultation, yet acknowledges that such legislation is needed to ensure Anguilla is compliant with international standards – and further acknowledges that she has no alternative solution to the banking crisis. After her passionate presentation in the House of Assembly, when the time came to vote on the first reading she remained silent. Additionally, it can only be “democrisy” when a statement is read in the House of Assembly purportedly on “behalf of the people of Anguilla” when the people of Anguilla did not democratically select, appoint or authorize anyone to speak on their behalf or approve the contents of the statement.
I cannot call it anything other than “democrisy” when the AUM Government sat like mother goose on the banking crisis for almost twenty months and did nothing to resolve it, then turns around and criticizes the current Government for proposing a solution within six months of assuming office. Isn’t it “democrisy” when the leader of the AUM has called on persons to join in a march to the Governor’s Office to register their opposition to the Bill, obviously with the hope that the Governor intervenes, when the former AUM administration was constantly at war with the British and were proponents of independence? Have we truly considered the message we are sending to the British Government by our actions? I must call it “democrisy” when the AUM is chastising the current Government for including well known economist Mr Marcel Fahie in the delegation that travelled to St Kitts this week to discuss the Bill, when the legal advisor to the AUM has travelled with the former AUM Government Ministers and Advisors all over the globe.
I caution our people not to get caught up in “democrisy”. Educate yourselves before jumping to conclusions about the Bill. Until you have done that, you are not equipped to responsibly exercise your democratic right to demonstrate, agitate or pontificate. It makes a mockery of democracy when you protest, breakdown doors and demand change when you do not fully understand the reason for your actions or the possible implications.
Whatever opinion you formulate about the Banking Bill, please let it be your own which you arrived at after objective consideration. Whether or not you support the Bill, your priority at this time should be for a solid banking sector for Anguilla. We ought not to allow ourselves to play into the hands of those seeking to protect themselves, those playing politics or the British Government which is unperturbed by the casualties that may be left in the wake of any solution it proposes. Our democratic rights should be exercised responsibly, prudently and in the best interest of Anguilla.
