I want to talk you about the decision made by the Executive Council to allow the appeal made by the Anguilla Animal Rescue Foundation (AARF) and others against the decision of the minister with responsibility for lands to issue licenses for Dolphin Discovery to operate facilities on the foreshore and on the floor of the sea. In other words, to operate a dolphinarium in Blowing Point Harbour.
In order to understand the circumstances that led to the Chairman of the Executive Council (The Governor) being placed in a position to break the tie that resulted after voting, it is necessary to understand the circumstances that produced such a situation.
One must understand, too, that there is a considerable difference between Executive Council meeting to approve the construction of a road and Executive Council meeting as a quasi judicial body to determine whether it should confirm or reverse licenses issued by the Minister of Lands for a business, such as a dolphinarium, to operate on the foreshore and on the floor of the sea.
With Executive Council meeting to approve a road, the Governor has no vote. With Executive Council meeting as a quasi judicial body, the chairman as the Governor is now called, has a casting vote to break a tie.
It is also necessary to understand how decisions are now made in Executive Council and the naked unwillingness of Ministers Evan Gumbs and Jerome Roberts to learn the basic rules of governance and their slavish reliance on outside instructions from a number of unelected and unelectable people.
For many years, decisions in the Executive Council were made by consensus. There was no counting of positions on any issue. If a member disagreed with another, insults were not hurled at him. Derogatory remarks were not directed at him. His fellow ministers reasoned with him, if they did not persuade him to change his mind, he simply noted his opposition and the views of the other ministers were allowed to prevail.
Today, decisions are not made by consensus. They are made by majority vote. What we have in Anguilla today can rightfully be referred to as decisions being made by “majority dictatorship.”
In order to obtain a deeper understanding as to why three ministers of Government put the Chairman of the Executive Council in a position to break the tie, it is necessary to understand the Beach Control Act. Section 4 (1) empowers the Minister of Lands to grant licenses for any business including a dolphinarium, to use the foreshore and the floor of the sea. Following application by Dolphin Discovery, the then Minister of Lands, Mr. Walcott Richardson, issued the necessary licenses.
Section 4 (4) of the said Act is highly relevant to an understanding of this situation, so I set it out in full. “Subject to such regulations as may be made under section 8, an appeal lie to the Governor in Council (Executive Council) from a decision of the minister as to whether such license should be granted or refused.”
Based on this section, the Anguilla Animal Rescue Foundation, The National Trust and several persons appealed to the Executive Council to reverse or overturn the decision to grant licenses made by the then Minister of Lands, Mr. Walcott Richardson. On the 23rd May, 2013, The Anguilla Animal Rescue Foundation and others exercised their right to have their concerns raised in Executive Council. Before the meeting, the Executive Council advised members to listen with an objective and open mind. I interpreted this to mean that one must not say or do anything to indicate how he will vote, one way or the other, at the appeal.
Unfortunately, Minister Evan Gumbs shot himself in the foot at the meeting. He became agitated and blurted out that he was supportive of the Dolphin Project in Anguilla. In light of Mr. Gumbs’ remarks, the Anguilla Animal Rescue Foundation complained in writing that he had already made up his mind.
Against this background, Executive Council inquired of Mr. Gumbs whether he wished to remain part of the appeal process or whether he wished to recuse himself. It was made clear to Mr. Gumbs in plain English that the decision was his. He admitted that he had made a mistake. He said that he had crossed the line. Therefore, he took a personal and voluntary decision to recuse himself from any further participation in the appeal process. This was evidenced by the fact that he did not attend the appeal held on the 12th June, at Executive Council Chambers.
My position, however, in relation to holding dolphins in captivity has been diametrically opposed to that of Evans Gumbs, Jerome Roberts and Hubert Hughes. In 2008, I opposed Dolphin Discovery illegally establishing a dolphinarium in Sandy Ground near the Mariners Hotel. I took a delegation of persons from my constituency, Road North, to the then Chief Minister, the Hon. Osborne Fleming. He and his then Ministers: Evans McNeil Rogers, Victor Banks and Kenneth Harrigan denied giving permission for Dolphin Discovery to setup shop in Sandy Ground. Mr. Fleming visited Sandy Ground. He observed the illegality. He kept his promise; he closed it down. I also opposed the establishment of the Dolphinarium in Blowing Point Harbour. In fact, during the 2010 general election, Hubert Hughes and I constantly forced the Front on the back foot with this very issue. Mr. Hughes repeatedly claimed that the Front had placed it in Blowing Point to embarrass and undermine him.
It was no surprise therefore to the Executive Council, on the 12th June, 2013, in the absence of Jerome Roberts and the Anguilla Animal Rescue Foundation and the other appellants, when I asked to recuse myself from the appeal process. I made it clear that I had opposed the establishment of Dolphin Discovery in Sandy ground and Blowing Point and will continue to do so. The Chief Minister was present and said nothing. As a result of my position, Jerome Roberts was called into the Executive Council Chambers. The Executive Council explained my position to him. I told him I wanted to recuse myself because if I am allowed to vote, I would vote my conscience. At this stage, the Chief Minister shouted that I did not have one. It was my observation that the Chief Minister’s statement fuelled Jerome Roberts’ arrogance. He insisted that I remain in the appeal process. He made it clear that he did not have a problem with me voting my conscience. Had he asked me to recuse myself, as I wanted to, the appeal proceedings would have come to an end.
A quorum is the minimum number of Ministers needed to carry on executive Council business. The quorum is two. Had I recused myself, there would only have been one Minister remaining, the Chief Minister. The Executive Council took the decision that I should remain, making it clear that they would be inviting the appellants into the Executive Council Chambers. They were called and executive Council explained my position to them. They said they had no objection to me remaining as part of the appeal process.
During the appeal process, I kept my promise and voted my conscience. At first, it appeared as if the Chief Minister was testifying on behalf of the appellants. To avoid doubt and produce maximum understanding, I set out his position in point form.
He is still of the view that Blowing Point Harbour is the wrong location for the Dolphin Discovery.
He hopes that someone can purchase it and move it to the north coast of the island.
The Front put it in Blowing Point to embarrass and undermine him. As you know, Blowing Point is part of the Road South Constituency which he represents in the Anguilla House of Assembly.
He now realizes the damage it is causing to the Ferry Boat Inn and other properties down-wind from Doplhin Discovery.
However, he will support it staying in Blowing Point because Walcott Richardson issued the licenses for Dolphin Discovery to operate.
With Evan Gumbs recusing himself and Jerome Roberts unable to vote because the appeal was against him as the Minister of Lands, a tie ensued. The Chief Minister and I voted differently. After a lengthy period of time in which nobody said anything, the Chairman turned to the Attorney General for advice. The latter advised him that he had the authority to break the tie. He did so, he upheld the appeal.
What was puzzling, though, was the conduct of the Chief Minister throughout the appeal process. At no time did he discuss the situation with me. At no time did he ask for an adjournment. Instead, during my presentation to the Executive Council, Mr. Hughes shouted at me, “hurry up, I have to get out of here by eleven, I have to go to England.” If he was faced with such a time constraint, the proceedings could have been delayed until his return from England. He could have requested an adjournment on another basis. He could have pointed out that Evan Gumbs had made a terrible mistake and therefore could not vote. He could have pointed out that the appeal was against Mr. Jerome Roberts in his capacity as Minister of Lands and therefore he could not vote. He could also have pointed out that I wanted to recuse myself from the appeal process. In light of the above, he wanted a meeting with all of his ministers to determine if there was a way out of this embarrassing situation.
Finally, he could have requested an appeal in light of Section 4 (5) of the Beach Control Act which made it clear that the decision of the Executive Council was final and could “not be questioned in any legal proceedings.”
It is troubling, too, that it appears that there are no regulations covering the operations of Dolphin Discovery in Anguilla.
In conclusion, I wish to clear up another misunderstanding. The decision taken by Executive Council is only in relation to the Dolphin Discovery operating in the Blowing Point Harbour. The Chief Minister believes that the north coast is the best place to locate a dolphinarium. There is no law preventing any company or person from applying for the necessary licenses to establish one there.
I want to make it perfectly clear, though, that I do not support keeping dolphins in captivity anywhere in the world.
(Published without editing by The Anguillian newspaper.)
