It was in vain that I had hoped to be able, by now, to find that the government, and more particularly the Chief Minister, had improved in the area of governance at least.
I had hoped that, in the wake of the Labour Code’s ill-fated and premature delivery, the Chief Minister and the other ministers in his cabinet had learned vital lessons in connection with the practice of consultation and creative planning. I had hoped that I could rely on his representations that we had improved our governance processes and that the British Government was now impressed with the AUF Government and his leadership.
By inviting the Chief Minister to provide us in the most recent meeting of the House of Assembly with full answers to our questions about the conditions the British government were requiring of us in connection with the 60 million pounds sterling grant, I was giving the Chief Minister, in good faith, yet another opportunity to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to our People. The Chief Minister well knows that it is only when we have all the facts in view that we can identify our options and reliably plan our individual and collective futures.
But sadly it appears that not only are we not being consulted about vital issues, as I have been complaining, but we are being systematically and, it appears, deliberately, deceived.
The Chief Minister gave a glowing account, in his most recent press conference, of his recent trip with the Financial Secretary and the Deputy Governor to meet with the British government and the European Union. But he told us – and this was clearly quite deliberate – only half the story. In other words he intentionally misrepresented the true position. He also withheld critical information that would help us better understand our circumstances.
And Minister Curtis Richardson appears to have compounded the lie by reeling off a wondrous list of intended developments, with scant regard for disclosing the potential problems of funding them.
As Hammer pointed out on his programme last week, the Chief Minister received a letter from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office dated 23rd December 2017, which said – and I quote:
“U. K. Ministers have asked that the Plan set out in detail the steps you intend to take to achieve a current budgetary surplus from 2019 onwards, with sufficient secured financing or operational surplus to cover debt repayments. To do this you will need to include:
– updated public finance projections from 2018 t0 2025
– clearly identified actions re public spending, including steps to increase the efficiency of the Public Service
– clear steps to raise revenues through increasing tax compliance rates, reducing arrears, extending taxation to sectors which are currently essentially untaxed, and putting in place a consistent policy on tax concessions
– a plan to manage Anguilla’s public debts.”
Other reports suggest that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and other agencies involved will be requiring jobs and salary cuts and an extensive reorganization of the Public Service as another of the conditions linked to the disbursement of’ budgetary support. Indeed this would not be surprising in view of the Chief Minister’s request for budgetary support in the post Hurricane Irma context. We also know from members of the Public Service who lost their jobs due to the passage of Hurricane Irma that the Government’s promise to facilitate relief for 2 months for them through Social Security have fallen through and only one of the two promised payments has been realised.
Since that letter received from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in December 2017 – yes, believe it or not since it – the Chief Minister has been telling us, the people of Anguilla, that there will be no increase of taxes in 2018, at the same time saying that negotiations are continuing with the British. He and his fellow ministers continue to bask in the delusional promises of extensive and expensive developments. It is hard to imagine a more comprehensive con, except perhaps his own party’s 2015 promise that “Its All About You”.
The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee has voiced concerns about the British Government’s ability to respond to future national disasters. Since Hurricane Irma and the devastation wrecked on three of the Overseas Territories, the United Kingdom certainly have a better understanding of the Overseas Territories’ vulnerability and the likelihood that the British taxpayers will be ever increasingly relied upon to get us out of our financial troubles. It is well known that U.K. Ministers find our requests for assistance unreasonable in the face of our repeated mismanagement of our resources and opportunities. The Committee spoke extensively of the lessons learnt. Did we learn any lessons? What is our Government doing to ensure we are included in the decision making at the U.K. Parliamentary level to ensure we have a voice in developing the collaborative international strategy the Committee has recommended. Will our people be ignored yet again? Is our Government even considering these issues ahead of the directives of other governments and agencies?
Just this past week the European Union required the Government of Anguilla, under threat of being black listed, to pass legislation changing our economic landscape. We have known of these initiatives for years but failed to plan for these eventualities. It appears we have yet again missed the opportunity to influence our economic prospects in any meaningful way.
Justice Mitchell, at the Caribbean’s Literary and Debating Competition, hosted in Anguilla the weekend before last, reminded our esteemed young leaders that “when we fail to plan we must necessarily plan to fail”. He spoke of the 5 P’s. In his words “Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance”. Indeed proper preparation and overall readiness has to do with a proactive generation of ideas and the critical analysis of all our options and resources. In our current post Irma context it has to do with effective leadership both at home and internationally and the development of a national rebuild and recovery plan in which all our citizens contribute and participate.
I know you are generous to a fault, dear reader, and you may be asking what else the government, and its leader the Chief Minister in particular, could do, wedged as he was and is between a rock and a hard place. Well I will tell you what he could do. He could and should have respected the resilience and fortitude of the Anguillian people, by taking them into his confidence and by enabling their indomitable spirit.
The severity of the crisis has, after all, been significantly exacerbated by a natural disaster beyond the government’s control or culpability. But sadly leadership of that kind is not in our Chief Minister’s repertoire. He believes that only he, and he alone, has the wisdom or skill to solve problems. Prove to us otherwise Mr Chief Minister. Engage with your people and do so honestly, frankly and with humility. Only by doing so can we possibly all hope to be pulling in the same direction for the future well-being of Anguilla and our people and especially for the young and future generations.
Where can we turn for alternative and better leadership you may ask. Dr Lorenzo Webster, on page 4 of last week’s Anguillian, would have you believe that it is to him and his party that you should turn In doing so he suggested that only a representative tied to a party can get “anything done”. He should find out what the people and causes I have helped, and for whom I have got things done as the elected member for District One and Leader of the Opposition, think. Indeed I would contend that it has been easier for me to get things done as an independent than it would have been for me as a member of the very party which, as matters stand at present – and of course the landscape may change before the next election in 2020 – the AUF needs to defeat if it is to retain power.
Dr Webster’s lengthy statement said pathetically little, apart from telling his audience that in District 3 they have “made a change” but that he couldn’t say at this point who the new candidate would be. Of one thing I can be very sure: I would not want to be aboard a rudderless ship with an absentee helmsman, however “hail fellow well met” that absentee helmsman may be.
Between now and 2020 I shall, God willing and with God’s help, seek to chart a better course for the pattern of government in Anguilla, that will enable Anguilla to survive and prosper for the next 50 years and beyond.
