Over the last week or so, in an effort to confuse the electorate once again, the Chief Minister and his son have been propagating a mass of lies and half-truths to shore up their waning appeal to the voters of this country. The Parliamentary Secretary, Haydn Hughes, put together and personally disseminated what he dubs a report on the situation in Anguilla since 2004. In his presentation, like Michelangelo, he tried to paint a picture, with spurious facts and fuzzy analysis, portraying the AUM Government in the most glowing terms for its performance over the last four years.
Were it not for the thousands of Anguillians who have been out of work for months and in many cases years, over that period; were it not for the many persons whose family homes are facing foreclosure; were it not for the many persons dying because of their inability to finance critical health needs; were it not for the many businesses closing because of their inability to meet their operating costs; were it not for the many persons who have lost their properties and transportation; were it not for the many students who cannot afford their tuition and boarding costs; were it not for the many children who continue to go to school without a decent meal; and were it not for the many persons suffering from unrelenting stress and depression — I would have thought it necessary to respond to the bogus and incongruous comments made by Haydn. However, like the late Honourable Bob Nesta Marley said: “Who feels it knows it y’all!” Such persons will not be able to identify with Haydn’s glowing presentation. Obviously, the Hughes family is not feeling anything.
Indeed the daily testimonies of real citizens all over Anguilla make nonsense of Haydn’s shameless attempt to hoodwink an already disillusioned electorate. It is an electorate that has been hearing the same lies for four years; it is an electorate that is tired of the blame game; it is an electorate that has had enough of the rude and abusive style politics; it is an electorate that has had its fill of marches and protests staged for no good reason; it is an electorate that has seen the Government fall apart to the extent that it no longer has its full ministerial strength; it is an electorate that is tired of conspiracy theories; and it is an electorate that is fed up with incompetent leadership. No doubt the Government has an uphill battle to convince many such citizens that it deserves another five-year term.
But if Haydn is Michelangelo then his father is Houdini. Once again he is trying to use smoke and mirrors to distract us from the real issues facing his Government. It is obvious that he is reluctant to surrender leadership even at the impressive age of eighty. But even more obvious is the fact that the “young Turks” in the party are also determined to cast him aside. It still remains a subject of heated debate whether the CM will run again — and the odds change daily dependent on the utterances from this father and son circus act.
At one time Haydn insists that he is the Candidate in Road South during the upcoming election, and the next Hubert declares that he will run because Haydn cannot win the seat. There are other permutations as to where these two prospective candidates might run to include Road North and West End. But perhaps the biggest breaking news came when Hubert announced on Keith Stone Greaves’ show that he is planning to create two additional seats at-large and he will run in one of them. This seems to be an accommodation/compromise reached between father and son as a means of resolving what was clearly a growing dispute between them. This pronouncement by the Chief Minister on National Radio immediately sparked some debate and concern. Some have raised the question as to whether Hubert can create these two additional seats — while others have stated emphatically that he cannot do it before election. I will therefore devote the remainder of the space in my column to this discussion.
Let me begin by saying from the “get-go” that Hubert cannot arbitrarily create two additional seats. The composition of the Anguilla House of Assembly is clearly outlined in the Anguilla Constitution at Section 35 (2) & (3). In subsection (2)(c) it states that there should be: not less than seven members elected in the manner provided by law. The Constitution therefore does not specifically prevent the election of more than seven elected members. However, the Anguilla Council Election Ordinance 1972 Section1 (2) clearly states that: for the purpose of election of members to the Anguilla Council Anguilla shall be divided into seven electoral districts each of which shall return one member to the Council. Therefore the law to which the Constitution refers restricts the numbers of seats in the House to seven making it clear that they shall be only one member elected per district.
When pressed on the specifics of how he would gain an additional two seats in the House of Assembly, Mr. Hughes indicated that those seats would run at-large or in other words island-wide. Neither the Constitution nor the Elections Ordinance makes provisions for seats at-large — so to run two seats at-large would at the least require an amendment to the Ordinance. And though the Constitution does not specifically prevent more than seven seats — there is no mention of seats at-large. I would therefore expect that there would have to be an amendment to the Constitution to allow seats at-large.
Another important point that needs to be made is that running candidates at-large will require a culture change of the way we vote as citizens. It means that if there are two seats at-large every voter is required to vote for three persons, namely, the person in your district and two other candidates, island-wide. It will require some education, albeit minimal, to explain this to voters prior to elections.
These three points make us identify at least three logistics of the process. Firstly, there is need for consultation and education; secondly, an amendment of the Constitution is required; and finally an amendment of the Ordinance. With elections no more than twelve months away I would suggest that all this would need to be completed within no more than nine months to allow the Supervisor of Elections and the Registry of Voters to be fully on Board. All things being equal this is not an impossible task — but it is an improbable one.
It is improbable because the Chief Minister cannot move this process forward unilaterally, simply to suit the circumstances of his party or his desire to run until he is ninety. There have been Constitutional and Electoral Reform exercises going on for more than a decade. The last two such exercises were chaired by two retired Methodist Ministers. One of those Ministers declared himself a candidate in the next General Election. The other has a daughter who has also been suggested as a possible candidate for one of these at-large seats. It is therefore highly likely that there are a number of potential candidates eyeing this proposal from the CM and “chomping at the bits” to take it forward. I foresee a number of probable issues.
First of all if there is going to be a constitutional amendment it should not be for the purpose of satisfying a party political position of the AUM. The Electoral Reform process recommended an enlargement of the House not by two new seats but by six. It recommended two additional districts and four at-large for a total of thirteen elected members. Any enlargement of the House should therefore not be a piecemeal process – it should be done in the context of overall electoral reform.
Furthermore, at this point, with the timing of elections uncertain, it would be unfair to Members of Opposition Parties to agree to any amendments to the Constitution and the Election Ordinance unless there is a fixed date for the next General Election. The Anguilla United Front will not support any piecemeal amendments to the Constitution or the Election Ordinance unless such arrangements are put in place. The Chief Minister can therefore expect strong opposition from the AUF if any attempt is made to take this process forward unilaterally and without proper consultation and an agreed period for education. In fact, we intend to send a letter off to the FCO immediately stating our position on this matter.
So in answer to the many persons who have raised questions as to whether or not the Chief Minister can increase the numbers of elected seats in the Anguilla House of Assembly unilaterally — the answer is no! Can he do so before the next General Election? The answer is no — not without the cooperation of the Opposition. Finally, as I pointed out very emphatically earlier, the Anguilla United Front will not be supporting any piecemeal amendments to the Constitution or the Election Ordinance without agreement on a fixed date for the next General Elections. Chief Minister! Lets keep it fair!
