Every time there is a general election campaign in Anguilla, a substantial high level of fear and foreboding creep into the hearts of many peace-loving persons with well-ordered lives and right-thinking perspectives. This is also a general reaction, in some parts of the region, where Caribbean small-island politics has virtually become abysmal, dangerous and even life-threatening. We pray that such an ugly and untenable situation would never raise its head in our still paradise island despite being besieged on various fronts by a number of societal ills.
It is that fear which, at the outset of the election campaign for the 2010 general election, had led the Anguilla Christian Council to draw up a Code of Conduct for candidates to follow. Further, the religious body invited all of them to a special service of dedication and to pledge, in the presence of Almighty God, to govern themselves with respect and dignity; to avoid tearing down the reputations of their rivals; and to refrain from consciously or unconsciously destroying the fabric, peace and quiet of our small and sensitive society. But alas! No sooner than they left the church doors, that there was a relentless blasting of each other in the campaigns across the island. Maybe it is time once again for the Anguilla Christian Council, in conjunction with the Anguilla Evangelical Association, to make another effort to quell the uncontrolled tempers of opposing parties and candidates from mushrooming into something no one would like to see.
At least the launches of two political parties so far – one just over two months ago and the other, a fortnight ago – were conducted in a manner which lent much respect to the occasions and the candidates; and dealt primarily with issues. Regrettably, to point fingers – and to listen to the comments of a number of persons – it is not possible to make that claim in all aspects relating to the launch of the third party several days ago. The catcalls, interference and name-calling, or otherwise harassment, by some party diehards and candidates were deplorable and uncalled for, and exposed the victims to ridicule and embarrassment.
It was not right, proper, fair, or in good taste, for persons, among the audience or on the platform, to make such scathing remarks at defenceless individuals who could not share the platform to respond. Certainly, when candidates in particular engage in that type of behaviour, they set a poor example for their supporters and encourage animosity and hatred. No wonder one individual, who shall be nameless in this editorial, reportedly launched an unprovoked attack on radio, a few days ago, after the meeting, expressing dislike for two media persons who are professionally committed to their work and have no time or interest in pandering to misdirected or arrogant party political dogma.
The Chief Minister, who was not at the AUM meeting, but submitted a recorded address, and Mr Patrick Hanley, who was a platform speaker, should be commended for the stand they took against that type of campaigning.
If Mr Hughes is truly retiring from active politics, or even if for some reason he eventually offers himself as a candidate, his pledge should be both respected and emulated. He said briefly in his recorded address: “Ladies and gentlemen, the AUM campaign will be positive and professional. Just as we did in 2010, we will be dealing only in issues.” While that claim may have its shortcomings, given the heated campaign then, his statement is a good example for all concerned – all parties and their supporters and all independent candidates and their supporters – to follow.
The simple message for all concerned is to keep the election campaign clean in order to avoid the spread of political hatred and disunity across the island.
