C4C seeks better ‘returns’ on MLA funding

| 07/12/2012

_DSC7978-web (2).jpg(CNS): Members of the Coalition for Cayman, a group describing itself as a political advocacy and awareness movement, have admitted funding MLAs in the past from both political parties but were disappointed with those politicians once they were elected to office. In response to comments made by the PPM leadership at a recent press briefing, the coalition released a short statement in which it said members had given money to people they thought would be independent thinkers but that this had turned out not to be the case. The group did not reveal which candidates that are now in office they had funded but made it clear that this time they want more from candidates that they help return to office.

“We have previously contributed to individuals in both parties,” the C4C stated in response to accusations by the chairman of the PPM that the C4C was a group of wealthy individuals trying to buy government.

“Those individuals were people who we thought were independent thinkers, who would stand up for what is in the best interest of the country. We did this in hopes it would have led to a better Cayman. But sadly, due to the effect of partisan politics it has not. We have learned our lesson. Even independent thinkers in a party are stifled by party leaders who put party first. That is why we are looking for independent candidates with integrity and proven leadership qualities that will put the people of the country first,” C4C said.

Aside from not revealing which candidates had disappointed them, the group has still not indicated what policies it wants the candidates it intends to finance to promote or exactly what the group believes is needed to put "country first".

Having formally launched more than one month ago, the group has not said whether it will be promoting a new economic pillar, increasing or decreasing taxes and fees, and if so, which ones. It has not stated if it supports the environmental law in its current format, where it stands on the ForCayman Investment Alliance, whether it will or will not support the landfill move, or any other pressing issues facing the country.

Given the collection of individuals that appear to be supporting the C4C, there is a wide diversity of opinion on what constitutes putting "country first". There are those who support the Dart deal as doing exactly that and some who are vehemently opposed and believe that stopping the deal would be putting country first. Some of the potential candidates have stated that environmental concerns are a priority and others who seem less concerned about that and more concerned about development.

Nevertheless, the group says that Independent leaders play a vital role in bringing about a balanced approach and holding the government accountable.It emphasised its intention to “endorse independent candidates and leaders who are committed to working together in the best interest of the country and our people,” but it did not explain how that will happen if their candidates hold opposing views on critical issues.

Answering criticisms from the PPM leadership that they had done nothing about governance issues over the last ten years, while corruption crept into the political arena, C4C said many of its executive members had and still serve the country on numerous boards at the request of both parties.

Still blaming the party system rather than politicians, the group stated that the system had become a partisan dictatorship, which had led to a decade of overspending and unprecedented debt.

“The Coalition for Cayman is committed to endorsing fiscally-responsible, proven, accountable leadership to provide government services without risking further financial burden on citizens and businesses,” it said, as it asked people to join the C4C.

See statement below.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Politics

Comments (20)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    Sounds like the C4C is just as “non-transparent” as other politicians we know. It is VERY important to know who they funded in the past to understand who they are. Who was it in the UDP that they gave money to? What exactly are their ideas regarding what Cayman should be doing?

    I see red flags with that group. Money and politics don’t mix well usually, especially when you’re looking for good governance.

  2. Polly Tricks says:

    If anyone wants change then :

    1. Start a petition for a referendum to be held on election day.

    2. The petition should have one quesition "MLA pay should be capped at $80,000" – Yes or No.

    3. All the MLAs would have to support a "yes" vote because they want to win their seats.

    4. Bingo – Cayman saves A LOT of money.

  3. Stormmy says:

    Ha ha!!…now I get it!!

     

    "The group……. made it clear that this time they want more from candidates that they help return to office."

     

    C4C actually mean they want to have more CONTROL over the decisions made by the people they financially support.

    So in other words, C4C actually means Coalition 4 Control !!

     

  4. Green Hornet says:

    What we really need is the Uk government to come in and clean house just as in TCI. Then let’s start from there!

  5. Anonymous says:

    If you could buy them for what they are worth, and sell them for what THEY THINK they are worth, then Cayman could wipe out the deficit in a heartbeat.

  6. Anonymous says:

    It sounds to me like they are happy with their attempts to buy politicians in the past.  I appears they will be attempting a new approach to their purchasing system in the future.

    Just what we need is a new non-party buying our politicians.

     

     

    • Anonymous says:

      If you think financial support to persons and political parties is a new thing in this island you must have been living on Mars? What you think funds the Christmas parties, beef, turtle, ply wood, cuc vouchers, hams, turkeys, back to school programs giveaways? Wake up and stop being naïve. Both parties have people who help to fund the machine is that considered buying politicians to you?

    • Anonymous says:

      Did you read the attached press release or just relying on a biased article?

  7. Anonymous says:

    “We have previously contributed to individuals in both parties,” the C4C stated in response to accusations by the chairman of the PPM that the C4C was a group of wealthy individuals trying to buy governmentes.

    So they have been contributing previously behind the scenes trying to have an unaccountable impact.  Again, I have to stress the need for transparency in the campaign contributions area.  Does anyone know if there is any requirement for disclosure?

    Also…when we're they formed.  Given that this group have contributed (the degree to which we don't know) to an MLA's election, they also need to be more transparent now that they are no longer lurking behind the scense. Please C4C…gives us specifics about how you wish to influence and i'll believe your credibility.  A good name ain't cutting it…..

    • Anonymous says:

      What do you think corporate cayman has been doing for decades? In the USA I think they call it lobbying

      Ask the parties and each MLA how much support they have received during campaigns and while they are in office. They don’t want to admit how help or support they have gotten over the years. Would you open Pandora’s box?

  8. Anonymous says:

    C$C should quit while they are behind. I swear each release makes them look worse.

  9. Knot S Smart says:

    I believe that potential voters who are not yet registered to vote and are deciding whether to register at all  – will run out of time before C4C announces their candidates.

    Come on C4C we dont care whether you call yourselves a team, a party, or just a bunch of rich people – just tell us who will run from your party so that we have time enough to decide whether or not its worth our time to register and vote. You might be pleasantly surprised by the support if you have good candidates.

    • Anonymous says:

      We all must encourage eligible persons to register to vote as soon as possible irrespective of who the ultimate candidate choices will be in any given district. Once registered, then each of us can make a choice whether to go out and vote come May 2013. If you don't register, you will have no choice to make. Choose wisely from now – register to vote before 2 January 2013!

  10. Anonymous says:

    Dear CNS – ppm, udp and c4c are not real parties so let’s stop pretending. Cayman politics has always been about personalities and a popularity contest. Some will either like McKeeva or Alden or those that don’t trust either leader for good reasons want to see something else for cayman. Everybody knows the people who have supported the parties so why is it a problem when those same folks decide not to? Cayman cannot keep doing the same things but expect different results. If u don’t like c4c that’s ok but be fair and wait till you see what they are for and the policies they support before you condemn them as looking for a ROI

  11. Anonymous says:

    So the people they supported in the past sucked. What a feather in their cap!

    • Anonymous says:

      Exactly!! And now they are about to do the same again. Give me a break.  

  12. Anonymous says:

    The c4c have former ppm and udp supporters so what is the big deal? I bet if those same individuals were willing to still support in the way people always show support by time and $ the ppm or udp especially Duckworth and Mclaughlin wouldn’t say a word, attack the personalities and would accept ever $ they are offered. Politicians are such hypocrites especially the self righteous ones in ppm and udp!

  13. FCO says:

    Its beginning to make sense:

    C4C is about disgruntled investors. They gave some money to BOTH parties and didn't get the returns they expected. So now they have decided that the best candidates for them to invest in are those are not Party candidates.

    And here I was thinking they were all they initially claimed to be.

    • Anonymous says:

      Did you read the statement itself, or just the headline which did exactly what itis designed to do and get a reaction?

      Ask yourself this, if these people at C4C were so rich, and so devious as to hash out a plan like this, do you not think they would have done it in a way that would be a little harder to figure out?  I mean really, if Jimmy, Jude, Emile, Gary… are the evil merchants that simply want to put the UDP back in power, why would they be transparent and be on the board that was just listed this week? Why would they not just take a few million $ and hit the road getting the votes needed direct the result they wanted?

      And if you take the other tale that is being utilized to scaremonger, that the rich merchant class can’t “control” Mac any longer, so they went to do this.  Would it not have been easier to simply buy some of the other MLA’s than to go through all of this? Or use some of those millions they have to spread the “wealth” and get who they wanted in?

      If these guys were as smart and cunning as you seem to think they are, would they not have had a more cohesive plan that wouldn’t have met the resistance that C4C has?

      Is it just possible that this is exactly what the C4C says it is, and they are simply doing the best they can to do what we all say we want, and that is for the people who live in Cayman to do something to make it better.  It seems the only way you get acceptance from the public is by having a march or rally.  Well  I can tell you that for a specific issue that may have some effect, but for the mess Cayman is in, we need to treat the disease.  I don’t know if C4C is the answer, I was very hopeful on the day of the launch.  The weeks following have left me wanting, and in hopes that this is not simply a show, but will have substance at some point.  As I am sincerely worried when the PPM once again in a race with only 2 options, worser and worstest, looks like the better of the 2 options.

      I beg the C4C to make good on your promises of a better Cayman.  Give us something that makes your “endorsement” worth if nothing more, the time spent at your launch and typing this response.  I liked what I saw, but in all honesty as I write this I realize I am defending a hope for something that seems to be not worth the effort.

      Kindly,

      The forsaken

      • FCO says:

        In retrospect C4C probably now realizes options that would have been easier – but that doesn't change their intentions.

        C4C is about these money people wanting to buy politicians.