The latest turn of events in Anguilla was the sudden firing of the Minister of Social Development, Edison Baird, by Chief Minister, Hubert Hughes, on Tuesday this week, having advised Governor Alistair Harrison to revoke the Minister’s appointment.
Mr. Hughes told reporters at a press conference on Wednesday that he had waited too long to fire Mr. Baird. “Over the years, I would say, almost from the inception, [that] I am guilty for not taking prompt action in respect of Mr Baird’s attitude to the people and his attitude to the Government; and the fact that he has never really been philosophically a true supporter of the principles of the Anguilla United Movement,” the Chief Minister stated. He said the AUM was not apolitical party but “a nationalist movement to propel Anguilla nationally into the 21st century.”
Mr Hughes continued: “People know how much I have tried. I have been criticised in the past for not dismissing Mr Baird from Government because he was bold enough to go on public radio and criticise my supporters, the other people in government… Whatever you do, Mr Baird was just criticising it, but making no constructive contribution to the running of the administration. It isn’t that I didn’t know of Mr Baird’s shortcomings, because I worked with him for six years in the past and he has never really run a ministry. He could never take part in a general discussion. Anguilla politics, being what it is, if I had to play any role, I had to get numbers…I always understand that until public opinion is on the side of a particular move, you should not make that move because it would be detrimental to your own image and people would misunderstand…On this occasion, I had to wait until the people were saying this is what you have to do.”
Meanwhile, shortly after receiving his letter of dismissal, Mr Baird issued a release to the media, the text of which is as follows: “My dismissal as a Minister in the Government of Hubert Hughes comes as no surprise. He has always been intolerant of careful analysis and any opposite view. I have had the view for some time now, that Mr Hughes as Chief Minister lacks the capacity to lead Anguilla, especially in these difficult times. This view is based on his conduct in the Executive Council, the House of Assembly, at home and abroad.
“He has effectively turned the running of the country over to his son, Haydn Hughes, the Parliamentary Secretary, and a small group of other unelected and unelectable people.
“Mr Hughes is the Chief Minister; Minister of Finance; Economic Development; Tourism; Labour and Immigration. Despite such a concentration of political, economic and financial power, he has failed to turn the economy around, as promised in the 2010 General Election.
“Rather than accept responsibility for his failures, he blames other people.
“I shall continue to serve the people of the Road North Constituency in particular, and the people of Anguilla in general. As part of the Opposition, I shall ventilate a range of difficulties negatively impacting the Anguillian people.”
Chief Minister Hughes has scoffed at Mr. Baird’s press release. “That was nothing new,” he remarked. “The rhetoric that Mr Baird used in his shallow statement was nothing new to you and nothing surprising to any sensible individual in Anguilla. Baird is not a judge of who I am or what I am capable of doing – the people are. I really don’t take seriously any of Baird’s rhetoric because it is all shallow rhetoric.”
Mr Hughes took issue, however, with Mr Baird’s claim that “he has effectively turned the running of the country over to his son, Haydn Hughes.” The Chief Minister stated in part: “The portfolios have been spread out. Mr Baird had Social Development. Haydn or nobody else has ever interfered with it. Haydn is not a member of Executive Council. Mr Evan Gumbs is responsible for Infrastructure. Nobody can say that Haydn interferes with Infrastructure. As Parliamentary Secretary, Haydn has been given the portfolio of Tourism…This cheap rhetoric, by Mr Eddy Baird, about Hubert Hughes’ son is very cheap and I don’t think that many people take it on. Haydn in his own rights is very equipped and highly qualified to do what he has been given to do, and he does it very well…”
Mr Hughes, who accused Mr Baird of making derogatory remarks about his government – on the streets – acknowledged that Baird’s vote in Executive Council against the Dolphinarium was one of the reasons for his dismissal. Hughes was of the view that if it were to be closed down, his government would “be faced with enormous suits by the many people who are now committing large resources [to the operation of the project]”.
Asked whether the Dolphinarium will remain open, Chief Minister Hughes said: “As far as I am concerned, the dolphin project for me should remain open because I said in Executive Council the procedure [of the vote] was seriously flawed – and if there was a case in court, I would have to come down on the side of the dolphin project because I realise that what happened in the Executive Council that day was seriously orchestrated and flawed.”
Mr Hughes indicated that he would seek to have the Executive Council reconsider and overturn its decision on the dolphinarium which, if allowed, could result in the closure of the project.
In the meantime, the Chief Minister is preoccupied with the redistribution of the portfolios held by Mr Baird. He told reporters that he had sent a memorandum to that effect to Governor Harrison and was awaiting his reply.
