Anguilla was once described as a Colony of the United Kingdom. It then became known as a British Dependent Territory. Now it is described as a British Overseas Territory. What changes in autonomy have we witnessed with these name changes? Some persons would argue that with the passage of years Anguilla’s elected leaders have lost, rather than gained autonomy. The feeling among many persons is that no matter the name Anguilla is called by it is a colony.
Many persons, including elected members of the House of Assembly, profess that the Governor runs Anguilla. According to some elected members, the Governor dictates decisions in Executive Council and determines what matters will form part of the agenda. This suggests that elected officials are unable to determine what matters should be discussed in Executive Council meetings and that the decisions are not made by elected officials. If this is indeed the view of anyone seeking elected office, it raises the question – What then is the value of our elected Government? A more troubling concern is why would persons who hold this view seek elected office.
The Anguilla Constitution in section 28 establishes the areas that fall within the Governor’s remit without the input of elected members and the areas on which the Governor must act in accordance with the advice of the elected ministers who comprise the majority of the membership of Executive Council. If the Governor is able to assume a dictatorship-like role in relation to the administration of the affairs of Anguilla, the quality of our elected leadership must be questioned.
The progress of the Goods and Services Tax over the past few years leads one to wonder how much of a role effective leadership plays when engaging with the British Government. How are our elected leaders to secure what they desire for Anguilla compared to what British officials may profess to be best for Anguilla?
The AUF (Anguilla United Front) Government in a time of dire need committed to introducing the Goods and Services Tax in return for certain monetary assistance from the British Government. The APM (Anguilla Progressive Movement) Government campaigned vigorously against the implementation of the Goods and Services tax in the run-up to the 2020 General Election. However, upon assuming office they implemented the Goods and Services Tax and professed that they had no choice since if it was not implemented the British Government would declare Anguilla a failed state. The AUF members, who were then in Opposition, expressed the view that despite their earlier commitment to implement the Goods and Services Tax, because of changed circumstances, they would have engaged further with the British Government and would not have implemented the Goods and Services tax as it was implemented or at the time it was implemented.
The General Election of 2025 approached and the AUF campaigned heavily on providing relief from the Goods and Services Tax. This is the tax that was implemented by the APM on the premise that it had no choice because of the demands of the British Government. The AUF was successful in the polls in February 2025 and effective 1st August, 2025 it revised the tax regime to remove the Goods and Services Tax and replace it with a General Services Tax Act and a Goods Tax Act. The AUF, through these two Acts, have sought to make good on its promise to provide GST relief. There has been no suggestion that the AUF Government has been stymied in its desire to effect GST relief, by the British Government. What has changed between the implementation of GST in 2022 and the provision of GST Relief in 2025? One obvious change is the change in Anguilla’s elected Government. Could it be that no matter the description accorded to Anguilla, whether the desires of Anguilla’s electorate prevail as opposed to those of the British Government depends on the quality of the leadership of Anguilla’s elected Government?
