In light of the challenges that many Anguillians face to secure opportunities for meaningful and sustained employment and financial independence, I must address the implications of a recent decision taken in the United Kingdom Parliament which has potentially serious repercussions for the British Overseas Territories. On 3rd May of this year the UK Parliament took a decision, as part of the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Bill, to require British Overseas Territories to develop public registers of beneficial ownership capable of being accessed by British Law Enforcement Agencies. If this decision is implemented in Anguilla, it will have a seriously negative impact on Anguilla’s financial services sector; a sector which is already experiencing decline due to the mismanagement of this current administration.
In addition, while the UK Parliament has specific constitutional and legal responsibilities in relation to overseas territories, the approach to this arrangement in the past has been one of partnership, shared values and, most importantly, a right to self-determination. Some have even questioned whether this decision taken by the UK Parliament was constitutional. I am indeed troubled by this high handed approach that directly impacts the way of life for many Anguillians and by extension our brothers and sisters in other overseas territories. Are we not entitled to self-determination as a people with a democratic system of governance anchored in the belief that everyone must have a voice? It is essential that everyone be included and participate in the decisions that affect their lives.
I find it most distressing that proper and meaningful consultation with the legislative branch of government in the overseas territories on this issue was non-existent, and that duly elected representatives of the people are being disenfranchised from their moral duty and responsibility. I also find it disheartening that Crown Dependencies such as Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man have all been exempt from this new law; Will the Overseas Territories’ business simply be redomiciled to the Crown Dependencies by reason of their privacy privileges?What message is the Crown sending in this regard? I would argue that Anguilla and our counterparts are more than capable of maintaining competitive financial services that are regulated by international laws and standards. Furthermore, we must concede that countries such as Anguilla and the other overseas territories are limited in terms of our natural resources, thus depending heavily on tourism and the financial services sector to create a better standard of living for our people. It is reasonable to expect that we will be treated as equals following the Brexit experience.
The financial services sector in the overseas territories now faces a serious threat to its long term sustainability. This sector accounts for a significant portion of GDP and is a gateway to foreign direct investments and meaningful jobs for our people. Most of the British Overseas Territories have already adopted the Common Reporting Standard/Automatic Exchange of Information regime relating to tax compliance, and have established systems to record beneficial ownership information for law enforcement inquires and due process. Personally, and as an international financial services practitioner, I have always advocated for high standards of legitimacy.This is a key factor in protecting the sector from corrupt actors who seek to do us and our reputation harm. I have always been a strong advocate for anti-money laundering legislation and compliance with international standards. However, this decision taken by the UK Parliament has been forced upon us, without proper consultation and no room for negotiation, compromise or consensus. This concerns me greatly and Cayman Islands is asserting that the decision infringes their right to self-determination. This situation also comes on the heels of the “Windrush Generation” scandal which has rocked the very foundation of British society. We are all now left to question whether such prejudice has seen a resurgence, manifesting itself in complete disregard and apathy for our democratic systems of governance and decision making here in the overseas territories. While in Anguilla’s case our right to self-determination is less clear, because we voluntarily relinquished our autonomy in international financial services in about 1992, under Sir Emile Gumbs’s leadership, it calls in question the varying practices and laws in the different territories.
Likewise, the unfair application of this law leaves a bitter taste, particularly when our prospects for economic growth are overshadowed by slowed recovery from the devastating hurricane season of 2017. I am greatly concerned about this issue, so much so that I intend to write to our governor calling for an immediate consultation.
In addition, I will reach out to legislators in the other overseas territories to discuss the matter further and to offer my, advocating on this issue with one collective voice. I have a duty and a responsibility as an elected representative, as Leader of the Opposition and as someone who cares about every Anguillian, to vehemently defend our right to increased autonomy and self-determination and even more persuasively, perhaps, to be treated fairly. It is arguable that our constitutional position, unlike that of Cayman and BVI, whereby the ultimate responsibility for our financial services industry rests with Britain, places us at an insuperable disadvantage. But the greater problem I see is the disinterest of our government. Do we even have a voice that is heard?
I intend to raise a petition on behalf of my constituents, on behalf of members of the private sector and all Anguillians, to ensure that our voices are heard on this issue. Please join me in this call to action to secure the future of our country for this generation and those to follow.
