The Anguilla United Front (AUF) Administration in the Executive Council Meeting of 21st March 2025 approved the appointment of new members of the Anguilla Tourist Board (ATB). Ex Min 25/46 provides that Executive Council “Noted the Stipulation that all appointed members of the ATB must complete a Corporate Governance Certification within three months of their appointment or as soon as the course becomes available. The training should cover but is not limited to, key topics such as i. The Principles of Good Governance; ii. Board Responsibilities in Corporate Governance; iii. Financial Oversight; and iv. Risk Management.”
A similar stipulation does not appear in other recent Executive Council Minutes appointing the members of other government agencies. It however appears that despite being absent from the Executive Council Minutes, board appointees are expected to undergo Governance training. The stipulation is nothing new and first originated with the AUF Government of 2015 under the leadership of Victor Banks. It was maintained by the APM administration, led by Dr. Ellis Webster, when it took office in 2020.
Does this reflect a real desire on the part of Governing administrations to see improved governance in the management of the affairs of Government agencies? The Editorial of 25th November 2022, which is reprinted below, examined the behaviour of the APM administration in relation to appointees that failed to pass the required Governance training.
“Good Governance – Is It A Real Aspiration?
The Anguilla Progressive Movement (APM) assumed office on 30th June, 2020 having won the General Election held on 29th June, 2020. Shortly after assuming office the APM administration made a nearly clean sweep of the Government Agencies by replacing most, if not all, of the members on the Boards.
According to the minutes of the 5th Meeting of the Twelfth Anguilla Executive Council held on Thursday 13th August, 2020 the Boards of the Anguilla Social Security Board, the Water Corporation of Anguilla and the Anguilla Air and Sea Ports Authority (AASPA) were reconstituted. In each instance the relevant Executive Council Minute provided that “all members appointed to the Board must complete Governance and Accountability certification and Public Financial Management certification training within three (3) months, with a body approved by the Ministry of Finance, failure to comply will result in removal from the Board.”
The AASPA Board has again been reconstituted, according to EX MIN 22/337 as set out in the Minutes of the 109th Meeting of the Twelfth Anguilla Executive Council held on Thursday 20th October, 2022. Of the nine Board members three are new, with six having served on the previous Board appointed in 2020. According to EX MIN 22/337 four of the six returning members did not pass the Governance and Accountability certification programme. According to the 2020 Executive Council Minute, failure to complete the training should have resulted in the removal of these members from the Board. This did not occur. Instead, the four members remained on the 2020 Board and now continue on the newly constituted Board.
EX MIN 22/337 states that the four members who did not pass the certification programme are to complete the programme and examination as soon as it is available with the Anguilla Community College, the University of the Virgin Islands, or an accredited body approved by the Ministry. In relation to the other Board members the Minute states that – “Board members will be informed in their letter of appointment that they need to pass the exam and the deadline by which they must do so.” EX MIN 22/337 like the 2020 Executive Council Minute refers to the removal from the Board of Board members who did not successful pass the examination.
Is any value to be placed on the stipulations in the most recent Executive Council Minute, based on what has occurred previously? Is it realistic to expect that failure will actually result in the removal of Board members? Everything points to the contrary position being more likely.
Doubt that there is any real desire on the part of the APM administration to ensure that Board appointees are exposed to and appreciate good governance principles appears justified, when one considers the utterances of Premier Webster in relation to his Government’s failure to secure the appointment of certain persons to ANGLEC’s Board. The Premier appears to place little importance on the need to comply with the bylaws that govern the appointment of Board members to ANGLEC. He appears unwilling to accept that his Government was subject to ANGLEC’s bylaws, and that its efforts to appoint directors to ANGLEC’s Board, therefore, required that it comply with ANGLEC’s bylaws.
Sadly, the decisions and conduct of the APM administration does not cause one to be assured that we are truly aspiring to achieve good governance here in Anguilla.”
Will the AUF administration also turn a blind eye to the failure of any of its appointees to satisfy the stipulation that they complete a Corporate Governance Certification?
