Political food for thought

| 03/01/2012

Judging by the blogs on CNS and public comment elsewhere, the current administration may be about as popular as this Christmas’ sour eggnog, but brace yourselves people because you could be drinking a whole lot more come May 2013 as the official opposition is not rated much more highly than the stale mince pies. There’s no denying that the current administration is hardly a smash hit with the people but given the current political landscape, it is highly likely that McKeeva Bush will still head up the next government.

With only around 14 months to go before nomination day for the 2013 election, the UDP remains the only cohesive political group that has at least half of the 18 candidates ready to go and a platform of proposals that could be loosely defined as policies to campaign on.

It’s evident that many people don’t like those proposals, be it the ForCayman Alliance or the partnership with a Chinese firm to build the cruise port, and they may not even like many of the candidates but the UDP still has some recognisable policies and lingering loyalty. It is also poised to take far greater advantage of the complex and unbalanced political landscape than the opposition or any of the new political groups that are rumoured to be emerging.

Despite speculation that this administration would likely collapse before going to full term because of the reported autocratic style of the premier in Cabinet, internal conflicts and, of course, the still mysterious investigation “into financial irregularities”, the administration has held on. In the face of one outrage after another, nothing has happened and Bush’s feet remain firmly under his very expensive desk on the fifth floor of the Government Administration Building.

And while most people are struggling just to pay grocery bills let alone keep their homes or businesses afloat, just enough of the party faithful are being assisted just enough to ensure their loyalty for the next election.

With the eighteen seats for May 2013 now confirmed in such a way as to ensure the political landscape will not be disturbed too much, by the time the poll comes around the UDP is still likely to be the most cohesive group to secure enough of the seats to ensure Bush remains kingmaker – even if he comes out without a majority he is still likely to head up the largest loyal group.

Although very few people who are likely to join the political race in 2013 have yet declared their hand, the street is already abuzz with the prospect of a whole slew of new national teams. These groups will be made up of independent candidates, none of whom are likely to share any sense of loyalty or policies and the only common ground is likely to be their opposition to the current government. Given the shortage of cash in Cayman at present, few are likely to be in a position to raise the money required to fund a winning political campaign.

The Cayman Popular Front, the People’s Democratic Caymanian Front, the Popular Front of Caymanians or even the Democratic People’s Popular Front of Cayman alongside the numerous independents that won’t join any groups or teams, will all ensure that the vote against the government is split enough to return the UDP to power because of the albeit small loyal voters the party is likely to maintain in several of the seats it will fight.

If the anti-government vote is split among what sounds like as many as five possible teams, groups and independents as well as the official opposition, the PPM will also not be able to make up the necessary ground it needs to return to power.

With only five members in the House and very little indication of who will be running with the PPM team in 2013, the opposition faces an uphill struggle. While theremay still be 14 months to decide on where and who will be representing the opposition, this is not a particularly long period of time to create a cohesive policy-led party that can offer the electorate a real alternative to the current administration.

The UDP has done a very good job of never letting the voters forget that the leader of the opposition spent too much on schools. Now while that may not be a vote loser in most other democracies where education is exactly where the electorate wants government to spend money, for inexplicable reasons the Caymanian voters did not think it was a wise investment.

The dislike of the current government is only matched by the disappointment in the opposition, which has left it exceptionally late to regroup and reshape itself into a government-in-waiting. If the PPM manages to pull together a strong and viable team and begin talking real policy plans about what it would do rather than depending on the current government to be the author of its own demise, it still has a glimmer of hope.

However, even the slickest comeback and party political cohesion could be undermined by the threatened emergence of these various popular fronts if they all become separate vessels sailing on the election campaign sea. If they manage to pull together into one cohesive movement that defines how it will work together and what it will do to give Caymanians hope for the future – the ever elusive third way – then it is possible that a coalition of independents could horse trade their way to government. But without loyalty in the ranks and no policy guidelines, its administration could be very short lived.

The more likely scenario emerging is a vote split guaranteeing the usual clean sweep in West Bay for the UDP and probably enough lingering loyalty for the party to scrape through in other multi-member constituencies, such as George Town and the Sister Islands.

In 2009 in West Bay the vote against the UDP candidates was divided up among seven other candidates, and what’s more, those voting for independent candidates did not use all their votes. While the 3,036 voters that turned up on polling day had over 12,000 votes at their disposal, less than 9,500 of them were actually used.

In Bodden Town Dwayne Seymour was voted into office with less than 37% of the electorate. In other words, 63% of the people in that district did not vote for him but he won the seat because of the split vote. The complexities of the local multi-member constituencies means that the political party with the most cohesive joint campaign that persuades the voters to vote straight (the secret of the PPM’s success in 2005) will be the victors.

It seems almost inconceivable that Bush could be premier for another four years given his rock bottom popularity factor but the irony of Cayman’s democracy is that the wider the choice, the more disparate the electoral field, and the greater the number of candidates on offer, the less democratic the government will be in the end.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Viewpoint

Comments (39)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. The Spider Web says:

    Food for thought, The now reigning Premier will head up the next election.  It is a waste of time to think otherwise, because I ask the question, who do we have can be a better leader.  Speak or for ever hold your peace.

  2. Harry B says:

    Mayeb we need to open up the eligibility to run for office to get a better field, maybe allow status holders, permanet residents etc to run for office as clearly we are only getting simpletons at the moment.  All the smart Caymanians are not going to run, they are making millions off their people, they are not going to change that. 

  3. Anonymous says:

    We need some new people to stand for elections. However we do not need people that have bad habits and are influenced by old heads like what has happened to recent new members of the Legislative assembly. And we do not need people who have never had a job or people who have messed up their lives other peoples lives and have failed at everything they have done. But people who have education,a good work ethic and succesful at what they have done. And God's sake those guys who ahve been running for elections 3 and 4 times please give us a break!

  4. Anonymous says:

    Can we have The Chuckster to the rescue again please !

  5. Anonymous says:

    If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck- THEN IT IS A DUCK! To have a 'coalition of independents' will lead to the same disaster that we have been experincing by way of this and the past governments. I am not here to bash UDP or PPM as quite frankly they are both self serving parties; however the PPM has NO alternative or solutions to the problems they are so quick to identify. The opposition has been a total failure with their mandate. One might not like what Mac is doing, or how he is getting it done- but it eveident that he IS getting something done- and yes, possibly not to the liking of all persons but its getting done. If Alden would lose some of his arrogance and humble himself- he could be a formidable leader. Do we need a third party/coalition? I say NO! Do we need REAL independents- I say YES. CNS- you have made some salient points and your probably correct is your analysis; however there is still alot of time but quite frankly the opposition is sititng by idly.

  6. Dreadlock Holmes says:

    Pretty dismal outlook CNS but there is also hope.

    I may receive a lot of comments for being naïve but I have never understood the concept behind party politics.  If true democracy is supposed to represent the needs of the people then the party system doesn’t seem tobe working very well.  For instance, if an individual running for political office in a constituency gives evidence of understanding the concerns and needs of the people in the area they should be able to stand a chance of being elected merely on that basis.  In party politics however, to increase their chances it behooves them to run as a member of a party.  Which may or may not be aligned with those needs and often aren’t.  Another problem exists when that political party has received more votes and therefore elected members from a different riding. With different priorities.  That person, even if a member of the party then becomes an ineffective representative.  How often have extremely competent people run for office and have not received enough votes because people believe they will lose out? Simply because one political party or another will probably win, and that person is not in either but rather an independent candidate.

    The biggest concern then is party politics seems more to involve hitching your wagon to the winning horse.  Even if the horse is lame.  Than it is effective in creating truly effective representation.  I’m aware that politics is often a matter of compromises in order to achieve goals, but within the workings of political parties there is room for concern, as members are apt to answer to the party rather than their constituents.  This happens way too often. They will make compromises in order to climb higher in the party hierarchy or to appease their leader when these are not necessarily in their constituency’s  best interests.  On the other hand, they remain silent when they should speak out.  There are quite a few concerns about this lately.  People want them to speak out, and disagree.  Why don’t they? But they are unable or unwilling to.

    In fact there are just too many compromises taking place in party politics we never know about.  Too much silence when stupidity reigns.  Their allegiance is to the party and we only facilitate.  Often their silence is purchased with a plum appointment within the party and or government.  A more fundamental problem for us is that in order for a political party, any political party to appeal to the most people their election agendas lack any detail. Assuming an individual running for office without party affiliations would have to be more specific on what they proposed to do, they would also be held more accountable.  Party politics allows (and supports) a certain vagueness. Some political candidates may find that advantageous indeed.  I believe candidates prefer it that way. 

    Voters now don’t necessarily vote for something.  Quite the opposite.  They express dislike and distaste for the incumbents.  That’s fine for the opposition.  It gets them off the hook.  And neither party need not give any specifics. Rather they snipe and criticize each other.  We’re all tired of hearing it. And it’s become a matter of flipping a coin when voting. 

    Socialism, the evil menace we’ve been told about, derives it’s sordid reputation from the concept of a one party system.  Often it is despotic. Because there are in fact no choices. We have optioned that into our present system of two or more political parties.  All of which may be just as despotic but the consolation is we have a choice.  But is that an improvement?  Or just a modification.  It is my view party politics- in either form breeds nepotism, corruption, and incompetence. And, in the case of our system favoritism of a portion of the population at the expense of the rest.  The party unfaithful.  For example a given constituency may vote a certain way for a certain party and therefore are paid attention to while another is ignored because they didn’t vote accordingly a political party, being aware of that difference in voting patterns will obviously steer certain benefits toward where they have support.  The faithful. This nullifies the idea of equal representation but we have learned to accept it or at least go along with it in consideration of party- based politics.

    Does party politics support proper or just governance?  

    An example might be a constituency consisting of candidate A, from the ruling party, candidate B from the opposition, and candidate C, who has decided to run without a party affiliation.  Candidate A will try to defend the doings of government and point vaguely to the progress achieved.  They can also point to the abysmal mess they inherited if they have just taken office a  short four years ago.  And say that they will need more time.  More time sound familiar? Candidate B will spend theirs criticizing A and his or her party.  And -what a mess they are presently creating. Hoping that in the past four years people have forgotten the mess they created.  Candidate C could spend their time criticizing both A and B, although those platforms have been taken.  Therefore, it is to their advantage to create an alternative, and state exactly what they are going to do.  They could do this effectively by offering the specifics missing from the others. In fact we would expect it. Tragically, if either A or B by chance were competent they are beholden to and doomed to follow party lines.  Even if: they disagree, see the party as inept, or have a better agenda in mind.  Because to jump party lines is just not done career-wise.  They are seen as turncoats. When in fact they may be competent.  Party politics prevents innovative ideas from taking place especially if the leader is stubborn or vindictive.

    Someone in the thread suggested a coalition of independents as an alternative and they were criticized.  Perhaps they used the wrong terminology.  I for one can not see a disadvantage to all candidates running as independents and see no reason why government could not function properly under those conditions.  It would in fact force co-operation in the legislature, rather than the childish bickering we now hear.  It would allow, as some have asked for more participation from competent individuals in the community.  Right now I’m sure many of these same people take a look at both parties and find both distasteful.  Why should they take a chance on affiliating themselves with either? These same people are sometimes in business and they know the results of partnering with people who are incompetent. Don’t have the same drive. Or vision.  The answer is: they wouldn’t do it in business so why should they do it in the realm of politics?  The party system in fact prevents those people from coming forward.

    As long as the failed system and status quo of party politics continues to be the only one we adhere to people who don’t come forward can’t be criticized.  But- if we embraced a different system based on competence and  allowing people to use their brains instead of blind allegiance to certain party principles politics would need to change and probably for the better.  Those people would be called independents free to act in our best interests, rather than those of a political party.

    Let the critcism begin about my grasp but I firmly believe a legislature consisting of nothing but independents freely elected would be a viable alternative to what we have now, and I would like someone to point out in what way party politics has in any way benefitted us, enhanced our democracy, or been to our advantage.  I am interested.  And don’t say it would be fractious or unworkable that’s what we have now.

    • Anonymous says:

      CNS, I think this should be a Viewpoint Article.

    • Anonymous says:

      “The biggest concern then is party politics seems more to involve hitching your wagon to the winning horse ” – well it worked for Ezzard during the last elections.

  7. Lachlan MacTavish says:

    This is probably a pretty good assessment of the situation. We have allowed the political system to be morphed into what it is and now the majority have no control over their destiny. The only way to save Cayman from repeating Caribbean history is if 17 out of 18 politicians start thinking about the country and the people. 

  8. Anonymous says:

    Sources close to The Chuckster has confirmed that he is preparing to launch the 3rd Option in May of this year………one year ahead of the General Election. The Chuckster has said out with the party system, the party colours and the Jamaican style of politics……..its time for the Caymanian way. I say lets do this BoBo.

    • Anonymous says:

      Really? Chuckie is the best you can come up with….May as well have Alden and the PPM..what's the differrnce…one is just as bull headed as the next!

  9. Anonymous says:

    Ever since Charles Clifford left the PPM they have been on a constant decline with Arden McLean staying pretty much silent except when him and Ezzard are on a mission.

    Alden is hopeless as a Leader and without Charles Clifford and Arden he will never be  able to muster enough credible candidates to mount an effective challenge to the UDP.

    It is time for Arden, Charles, Ezzard and other good people to join forces against the evil that is at play in our country. Time is of the essence guys…..this country cannot take another four years of McKeeva !!!

    Think of Nike's tagline…..'Just Do It" !!!!!!

  10. Anonymous says:

    It is high time that the next generation of Caymanian businessmen and women stepped up to the plate and formed a new political party on a platform of executive competence and good governance.  There are enough of them.  You know who you are.


    What these people need is an inspirational leader to coalesce around.  You also know who YOU are.  For God's sake one of you grow a spine before your country goes to the dogs.


  11. Anonymous says:

    Come on Wayne Panton, step in, we need you!

  12. so Anonymous says:

    Some problems like Cancer are meant to be terminal.  It is the ONLY way to fix it.

    Early RIP Caymanian cayman.  It is exactly like letting the kids run the household with the expected results.  You want a grown up world you need to let the grownups run it.  To bad the kids are tired of listening to the grownups and are not smart enough to know better.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Bush is a wiley old fox. One thing despots and demagogues understand is how to hang on to power.  The Premier's nightime reading is most likely Machiavelli's The Prince!  He's already bought the votes of the religious with his $4.1M handout; the civil servants by reinstating their 3.5% pay cut, and he'll soon secure the votes of another another 125 families with his mortage support giveaway, and all Caymanian's employed by the Dart Group are a sure vote — although that's probably not that many thinking about it!  Plus, people have very short memorie, and the investigation into financial irregularties (which, if it hasn't concluded by now, never will.  Mr. Miller and Mr. Leader of the Opposition: if you're waiting for anything to come of this, you wait in vain!) the GLF and Cohen debacles, the WB road, and so on will be distant memories at the time of the next election.  If the opposition party(ies) do not work extremely hard to produce high-caliber, well-educated, and qualified candiates; along with a PROPER, credible, and well-thought-out manifesto to present to the electorate (Leader of the Opposition: your detailed manifesto should be nearing completion by now), the return of the UDP with Bush as Premier is the most likely outcome at the next general election.

    • anonymous says:

      hmmm… wiley old foxs are "red" – not blue. could it be alden and mckeeva's about the same thing?

    • Anonymous says:

      You miss one intangible criteria – candidates must also have charisma. No matter how educated, if the electorate cant connect with you, you wont pass the test and you wont win the votes.

      The problem with most highly educated people is that they are very narcisistic and arrogant and act as is they are better than everybody else. Thats a big problem the PPM leader has.  Bad strategy.

      On the other hand, Mr. Bush has the love of his people behind him. They wont desert him no matter what, because they know, that despite everything he will always be one of them and they live vicariously through him.

       He's gonna win the next election too – just you wait and see. Know on ting, he got my vote!


  14. Anonymous says:

    You look around worldwide where people have had high hopes that when a new government comes in things for the country and its people would improve – well, it usually doesn't. Turns out that the majority of politicians nowadays learn very quickly how to forget all the promises they made during their election campaign and how to ensure they themselves, their families and friends get ahead.

    The two party system in Cayman does NOT WORK. Unless there are a couple of other parties (and for that Cayman is too small) we will always be going back and forth between the two.

    The only way things can change if some of the independents are voted in, to ensure there is a mix of people with various political views, forcing everyone to come to the table and work together – but then we all know that this doesn't stop someone who came in as indpendent to allign themselves with oneof the parties later on…….

    So – the only way things can change if people refuse hand-outs and favors and the majority of population uphoalds high moral and ethical values and people stop boasting that they have a "connection" – but then we all know the majority of people don't give a crap as long as their little favor gets done because people don't seethe big picture and still don't understand that this favor given and taking is the biggest problem that has brought down this country!

  15. Anonymous says:

    I do not have faith that the head of the PPM has learned the lesson on the captial spending project. Everytime I hear him speak I hear excuses instead of I made a mistake. I shouls have only built 1 school given the uncertain economic forecast and I made the design too extravagant and the wave tile floors which require tlie prople from Florida to finish was an example of waste pure and simple.

    I was competing with Camana Bay and making the people of the Cayman Islands pay for it.

    Until I hear this mea culpa my concern will remain.

  16. anonymous says:

    Interesting that CNS is trying to rally the opposition troops- this should be the role of the 'missing' opposition party.  But, so be it.

    This one is not simple to call but not because of the "split vote" effect mooted in article. At this point even if the economy improves significantly the UDP will be thrown out. People will follow world trends and throw out the incumbent government no matter what. Unfortunately this will happen in USA later in year as well and that will be the set up for our elections six months later given our dependent use of US media sources.

    However on the bright side, the PPM is unlikely to win (no current ideas and "been there, done that, bought the T-shirt" effect) as there will likely to be a credible alternative to both PPM and UDP–I disagree with the article, there is time and the people want it. The next government in Cayman will at worst be a coalition government of Independents or OF Independents forming a new "team"- the latter more likely. Interestingly either way the next government is highly unlikely to be headed by Bush or McLaughlin.

    Lets see what happens.


    • Anonymous says:

      Wow, if (IF) that should happen, what a state of confusion and chaos, we will have on our hands. No leader, 18 members squabbling for power and seats, no plans for the future, all screaming, I have the solution, all wanting premiership. All wanting ministerial positions. I can see it now. Caymanians sitting by as the entire economy collapses around us and the UK stepping in to take over. That is what you will call a true T&K scenario you can bet your bottom dollar on that.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Sadly the CNS assessment may be correct.

    The UDP is a disaster

    The PPM have came out with one coherent policy position on immigration  a few months ago but then returned to the pattern of sitting back collecting their paychecks, accruing pension entitlements and generally doing nothing to justify either. I sincerely hope that some 3rd alternative to the UDP and PPM presents itself soon. Otherwise we are going to need platting and rope making lessons.

  18. Confused says:

    Great viewpoint and a very accurate description of the current political status quo.

    The country seems desperate for change after years of scandals and financial mismanagement by successive administrations but what has the PPM and the new leadership done to convince people, independents and potential candidates that they have a comprehensive plan and real solutions for the country in 2013?

    The UDP are a complete mess but what makes the PPM any different? I fear for the present yet dread the future given the lack of leadership, political opposition and alternatives to these two groups of who are out of touch with the people.

  19. Anonymous says:

    bring in direct rule for 2 years….

    udp have been a disaster…

    ppm for some reason are unable to suggest alternative policies 

    independents only pander to the backward small town mentality…..

    • anonymous says:

      If you are not the actual FCO, you should speak to the good folks in the Turks & Caicos Islands before you say such nonsense.  Direct rule has brought them chaos, massive goverment debt, loss of civil liberties and even charges of continued curruption. It is clear that the UK 'governance' is not the answer.  Even the UK Parliament has chastised the FCO for the poor managment of the Colonies. If one reads the 1000 year history of the UK and its colonies I am sure you would not ask for this.

      Here is an example of issues from the T&C press.:


      • Patter says:

        Not to mention the decline of their financial centre. After the bad news and reputation of corruption there, TCI will have no choice but to go Independant.  And then you will hear the UK's FCO respond that they never needed these people anyways. That is how the Foreign Office operate. First, wound the goose, take away the golden eggs, and then let it go loose to fend for itself. They don't care about the people there. All they want is the eggs.

      • Anonymous says:

        so what would have happened if the uk did not step in???…another jamaica/haiti?…….the tci should be thanking their lucky stars….

        • Anonymous says:

          When are people going to learn that the UK is not a friend.

          • JimBob says:

            maybe when you supply some evidence to the contrary. T & C would be a violent mess if not for the UK. There is no doubt about that, 

      • Chris Johnson says:

        The massive debt was created by the crooked governments and the politicians. Fraud abounded. It in effect was brought about by the public that elected Michael Misick, now in refuge in the Dominican Republic, in the first place. Sound familiar?

  20. Anonymous says:

    Interesting and well put — however, changing the voting system to 1:1 voting would have meaningful import to this dilemma.


  21. AW. says:

    Cns, first, UDP has a following who don't visit your site or rate your polls. Many of their supporters are expats like Dart who were granted Caymanian Status back in 2003. About 2000 to 3000 expats were granted status under Bush, and they are not in the business of blogging on this site. Secondly, I have to say that the PPM party has really dissappointed me alot. I am no more PPM. I would prefer that all Independants come together and start a "Coalition of Independants" where those whoare Independant and willing to represent their constituency directly (instead of a party), can do so. I am done with party politics, this "vote straight  nonsense," the Uks difference to the whole matter of the value of people-democracy, and many Caymanians are fed up as well.

    • Anonymous says:

      It is people like you who put McKeeva Bush in office last time. Forget about coalition of independents. The whole Team thing went out in 2001. If you don't like the PPM form a better party. Either way for God's sake do not let Mckeeva Bush return to power. 

    • Anonymous says:

      What a really wonderful idea!  A coalition of independents, (your vocabulary expresses your intelligence). Perhaps you should go back to school and try to understand how an elected government functions.

      There are really good reasons why Political parties are important in our type of government and it is too bad, that in this day and age, so many people stick their heads in the sand and refuse to enlighten themselves about the benefits of the political party to good government and effective administration.

      It is difficult to expect progress if we constantly try to move backward and live like how people lived 30 or 50 years ago. That is just not going to happen. No matter how much people like AW try, Cayman cannot and will not go back in history. We will move forward, so stop putting your head in the sand and yelling to the topof your lungs. Displaying ignorance is not the best way to influence the future. 

      People can dislike Mac, Kurt and Alden as much as they want, but if the 3 of them believes in the benefits of a political party then that speaks volumes about that matter. Political parties would function much better and provide the country with more leadership, if less people continuously put their heads in the sand but joined a group and tried just for once to actually learn something instead of teaching, what they know nothing about!

      • anonymous says:

        For 100 years Independents and teams have run the Cayman Islands and successfully. In the last 10 years we have played around with 'parties'. What has that given us??…a massive debt, total choatic discourse politically, lack of supporting of real needs of Caymanians and even cousins not speaking because they have on a tribal shirt of some colour or the other.

        While the idea of a political party is effective with our type of government its main benefit is to the UK right now as it is easier to control the local government as you only have to convince one party head of something and he goes forth and executes it. Plus the UK loves local division- for a 1000 years they have done this effectively.  They used it very effectively to control 300M in India during the British Raj with only 950 civil servants!  think.

      • Dred says:

        It amazes me from such intelligence (as you claim to have) bleeds so much stupidity.

        Party system breeds corruption. I like the other poster woudl much prefer a more independent style system as we had before because generally when we have parties we only basically get one persons ideas bleeding through as in the case of UDP it is MB way or the highway. Just ask Cline.

        Generally silly people like you tend to look at this sort of thing as a step forward simply because things can get done faster but faster is not always better and generally is often wrong. With controlling parties not needing other votes to pass a bill simple things as debating become basically unneeded.

        Parties also tend to want to go around the systems we have in place and we then start seeing such things as:

        1) Abuse of the 21 day rule

        2) Going around CTC

        3) Dismantling of board

        and a host of other things.

        I know we will probably never fully remove the party system but I for one would like to see some sort of oalition myself of independents possibly with Ezzard at the head of it.  If to do nothing more than to make independent candidates have a chance to show that they can provide fresh insight into issues we currently face today.

        • Anonymous says:

          You are confusing party politics with corrupt leaders!

          Perhaps you should research how some of the independents did their work of years gntiine by.

          What we need is honest leaders and honest voters who do not want to sell their vote.

          Until we can get people to be more open and honest we will always have corruption. Political parties do not breed corruption, our elected leaders make political parties corrupt!

          • Anonymous says:

            Rather, you and Dred need to consider a better option like replacing the whole politcal system. If it is not working, revamp the whole thing. Get a new and better revised Constitution that makes sense, prevents much of corruption, and ensures more democracy for Caymanians. Simple. Caymanians need to get off their butts and push forward for such changes. It is not going to come to them on a golden platter.