Guest Writer
Guest Writer's Latest Posts
In response to the payroll tax announcement
This makes me want to puke! Not so much for what the premier has announced but for the fact that Caymanians have sat on their hands allowed things to go this far and yet Caymanians have done nothing more substantial than bray like a jackass with a case of colic. Far too often Caymanians blame our plight on past administrations, other people, and myriad external factors – but we continually fail to accept that the person we look at in the mirror is the prime culprit behind our descent into the abyss.
Make no mistake, Caymanian born and bred stupidity and complacency is the prime cause of the mess we are in; not expats, not past administrations (or even present administrations): they have only done what Caymanians either encouraged or allowed.
It is easy to blame others, but the truth is that years upon years of ignorance, years upon years of mindless and idiotic voting, and years upon years of ghastly complacency and poor choices on the part of "born" Caymanians is what has plunged us to this depth.
Our autocratic maroon wastes money with impunity. He makes sweetheart deals and gives away our birthright to enrich opulently wealthy collaborators. He ridicules the rational leaders among us, and he all but dares us to do anything about it. As the country becomes stifled with debt, Bush gives away rights to future tourist tax dollars to an already fabulously rich developer! He fails to curb his extravagant spending and trim the expenses as urged to by the UK. Now he has the audacity to declare, out of the blue, a payroll tax!
And yet Caymanians do nothing but pass gas about it. We have turned into a country rife with lazy, complacent people, incompetent morons unable to plot a sound course for ourselves, so we haul up the sail under the command of even bigger morons .
The Cayman Islands is brimming with poltroons who whine and bitch and complain but are too self-involved, too impotent and too cowardly to do much else than snivel and whimper like whipped puppies. These lemmings who smile as they head over the cliff make me sick! The huge number of recreants in these islands make me ashamed to be called "Caymanian".
Caymanians push out their chest and say "I am Caymanian, worship me!" but yet they cower like sycophants before a despot who is bringing their so-called "beloved" islands to the brink of disaster: these kind of people are nothing more than contemptible craven caitiffs.
"Beloved Isle Cayman" my stinking foot! Show me someone who loves these islands enough to do more than sing off key about them with a misty nostalgia in their eyes and I might believe those words. Far too many of our people are inflated with the putrid flatulence of some pathetic semblance to ethnic pride but are too yellow-bellied to manifest any real pride in their own land and empower themselves and make their voices heard.
Caymanians claim to be a wise and independent people. Ha! What a joke we are making of that idea! No wonder we moan that we are the laughingstock among local expats. "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools…" Yep! That's us! We deserve all the contempt and derision than can be heaped upon us. Just look at the man we chose to lead us! (Well not me but a big bunch or born and bred morons chose him.) We are quick to give our opinion and pontificate on anything and everything, but when it counts the most, Caymanians as a whole are too impotent to impose their will in any meaningful way. In unabashed arrogance we lord it upon those who visit and work here but in reality a vast number of us are a cadre of cringers, too fearful to go nose-to-nose and do what has to be done to get the point across with any tenacity, courage or meaningful impact.
Show me loud, boisterous, passionate 24/7 protest marches that angrily demand that the UDP step down; show me likenesses of Makeewah and his minions burned in effigy all across these islands; show me work stoppages and strikes; show me UDP/Makeewah meetings aborted due to a deafening chorus of boo's and chants from an angry throng of people who think he and his minions need to go NOW. (Somebody show me some bloody courage, dammit!) Make some signs for us to wave, organise the grunting masses; let me see that Caymanians have some balls and I may cease to feel the urge to put a bag over my head when out with expats who know me and can brand me as being Caymanian.
I can hear the lily-livered snivelers among us now: "Oh no! We can't do that! It would cause instability." "It would look bad." "It might scare off investors". To these lackeys I say "Wake the hell up, you damn idiot!" Can't you see this country is already doomed if we continue to stand doltishly by picking our noses and whining? Don't you think we already look pretty damn bad and are looking worse by the day! What investors? The only investors around are the ones Mac wooed by giving up concessions and favours as if Cayman were a cheap whore. If the sky does not fall when a substantial part of the country grinds to a halt because of a glitch at CUC, the sky will not fall when the country grinds to a halt because of a loud and clear call to good governance and civil resistance to despotic power. Yeah, darling … it might be time to get a little rude!
For too long I and precious few others bold enough to tell it like it is have borne the brunt of being labelled as firebrands because we publicly have gone against the powers that be in regard to critical issues, while the rest of you snivelling whiners sat in the shadows. If there was any sign of life among you pusillanimous zombies it was usually expressed by quiet nodding and the occasional murmur of approval, all the while you look around in paranoia that you might be labelled a non-compliant rebel by expressing support for those who were exercising their right to free speech and putting it on the line.
If you read my postings here you know I tend to speak my mind. I am usually no less candid in public venues I can assure you. If you think for a moment and recall the voices that have abraded our lords and masters the most; think about those whose few who are brave enough to be outspoken and pro-active on important issues, those whose stubborn non-acceptance of every whim of government have made a difference: my voice was among those that you have heard.
Now it is time for more than just talk! Bush loves debate, darling! He relishes the opportunity to exchange words. He thrives on hot air. As long as we merely talk, Bush knows his tyrannical reign is quite secure. As long as his subjects remain suitably docile he knows they are impotent to stop him from doing whatever he wants.
More talk will not change things. It is time for action. I will be contacting those who I know are like-minded to begin to organise mass protests. I know others will be doing the same shortly. Icall on many many many more others reading this to do likewise.
Caymanians! Wake the hell up! It is time to stop whimpering and do something! It is time for concerned Caymanians to take off the kid gloves and come together en masse and make our will be known! If this goes like the referendum vote and mass protests fails to materialise, then Caymanians indeed are the pathetic clowns we claim that some expats take us for.
Please circulate this message and make it go viral all across this land. Do it for your country; do it for yourselves!
Appeal court cuts 3 years from gunman’s jail time
(CNS): A gunman who had pleaded guilty to possession of an unlicensed firearm last year had his sentenced reduced by the appeal court Friday. Robert Lewis Terry was arrested in the basement of the Caribbean Club on Seven Mile Beach last year after staff called the police as they believed he and othermen were acting suspiciously. He was successful in his appeal to bring down his twelve year sentence to nine years. In a case partly heard behind closed doors, Lucy Organ of Samson McGrath argued that her client had not been given enough credit for mitigating circumstances, including his guilty plea, a lack of evidence of the gun being used and that Terry had no previous convictions for violence.
When Terry was arrested police found equipment, including a mask and gloves, that was likely to be used in a robbery in the back of the car which they said Terry was using.
However, Organ said there was never any evidence that Terry, who was not driving the car, was aware of the content of the boot or that he was involved in any conspiracy to commit a robbery. She said the crown had accepted that Terry only came into possession of the gun when he arrived at the car park under the Caribbean Club, and when the police turned up the men he was with had fled, leaving him in possession of the 9mm Glock pistol.
The defence attorney argued that the judge was not entitled to find that the defendant was in possession of a weapon in order to commit an armed robbery as there was no DNA evidence linking him to the mask or gloves in the car’s boot.
The appeal court judges agreed that the judge had failed to consider the mitigating circumstances when he handed down the 12 year sentence to the 26-year-old man in December last year and cut the prison term to nine years.
Even though Terry was in the carpark with several other men at the time of the incident, he was the only person charged as he was seen by the police to drop a bag into the bushes, which later turned out to contain the firearm and ammunition.
Sales tax is a good alternative for Cayman
Sales Tax is simply a consumption tax paid at the point of sale to the consumer. Import duties, such as we now have, actually work based on the cost of goods imported and is therefore also indirectly a consumption tax, but it is collected by government when the goods arrive and before they are sold to the final consumer.mI believe that all of the parties involved in importing and consuming merchandise in this country would benefit if we replaced our current import duty system with a sales tax.
There are two types of importers addressed here: businesses that import goods for resale and entities that import goods for private or personal use.
In relation to the first type of importer I suggest that all of those who maintain a business establishment, such as retailers and wholesalers, should be issued an importer’s license based on their specific business license.
If the sales tax system is utilized then when merchants import merchandise for re-sale, they would simply have to pay the port charges and file copies of their invoices with the Port Authority, then have the goods scanned for contraband by Port Authority, and receive the merchandise.
Most point of sale software being used by businesses today already has an option for collecting sales tax. These licensed businesses would collect the sales tax on the retail amount of sales and pay it directly to the Treasury on a periodic basis.
The second category of importers would purchase a single-use importer’s license based on 25% of the value of the goods including the invoiced cost, plus the shipping costs.
What are the strengths and what are the weaknesses of this proposal?
Strengths:
A. Government will earn more revenue on the same amount of imports.
B. Retailers will have lower inventory costs – resulting in less capital outlay.
C. Consumers will pay lower overall prices even including the sales tax.
D. Consumers might support the local economy rather than shop overseas.
E. A substantial reduction in employees and operating cost of the Customs Dept.
F. Consumers will not experience much of a change with the new system.
G. Using a sales tax system would simplify the current varied import duty system that we have at present.
Weaknesses:
A. Relying on the integrity of retailers to pay collected taxes might be a weakness.
B. The private importers would pay slightly more for their imported goods.
C. Retailers might be burdened by the responsibility for collecting the sales tax.
D Duty Free Stores would need to be treated differently to maintain their status.
F. Relying on the integrity of merchants to pass savings to consumers is an issue.
The attached comparison reflects the income and savings realized if we discarded our current customs duty system and replaced it with a sales tax system. Please see attachment titled Sales Tax.
This analysis shows that government revenue from imported goods will increase based on the amount of mark-up that merchants charge their customers.
While nobody wants to really address the amount of mark-up that retailers make in Cayman, It is believable that with the cost of operating a business in these islands, a realistic mark-up has to be around 70% of the cost of goods and shipping.
Merchants have to take into account the cost of employees, utilities, government fees and business licenses, health insurance costs, pension costs, the cost of theft, the cost of spoilage, the amount that is invested in inventory, the cost of facilities, the cost of warranties, charity, fuel costs, property, vehicle, and liability insurance, and many other expenses. Additionally they must make a sufficient profit so as to cover rising prices, and the increased cost of restocking their inventory. Finally they must make a return on their total investment.
Market size is also a negative issue for businesses operating here, a country with a relatively small customer base and numerous competitors.
It is therefore safe to assume that operating costs are high, and average profit margins have to be considerably high.
The assumption here is that a 70% mark-up rate is average, and the figures below are based on that rate. However, the attached file, as I indicated above, includes various mark-up rates from 10% to 150%.
The figure used for this analysis is a sales tax rate of 17%.
In summary the attached Excel file titled ‘sales tax’ shows that no matter what mark-up rate the merchants presently use, a sales tax of the suggested rate (17%) would result in consumer savings of 4.10%.
The amount that merchants invest in inventory will decrease by an average of 18%, resulting in savings for the merchants. This figure is arrived at when the 22% import duties are removed from the current total cost price plus import duty.
Government revenue from imported merchandise will increase by 31% on the same amount of goods when the average assumed local mark-up rate is used.
When all of these savings are multiplied by the value of our imports it is easy to realize the significance of replacing our current import duty system, with a sales tax system.
An additional financial benefit is that the cost of operating the customs department will be reduced by having fewer employees, thereby bringing substantial savings to government.
Recent events in the Turks andCaicos Islands (TCI) indicate that a Value Added Tax (VAT) system has recently been introduced to commence next year. A VAT system as used is many countries of the world is similar, but more complicated than a simple sales tax, as I am suggesting.
With our own government facing revenue shortages, it is only a matter of time before we ourselves might be required to institute a VAT and this will create a substantial financial burden on merchants and sellers that are already overwhelmed with financial difficulties.
As the name VAT indicates ‘value added tax’, is similar to a sales tax but from the seller’s point of view is more complicated. The VAT is calculated only on the value added to a product. This will result in an accounting nightmare for local merchants and greatly increase their record keeping expenses, so as to prove the value that has been added. At the same time we would most likely still retain our import duty system, plus the value added tax of whatever percentage.
It therefore might be more beneficial to the local economy if we did away with our current customs import duty system altogether and substituted a more stable and economically beneficial sales tax system as I am suggesting.
In my humble view a VAT system is the first step towards an income tax system, as it requires businesses to provide government essentially with information on their earnings. TCI should not be too surprised that income tax will be their next alternative when the next budget crisis arrives.
We in the Cayman Islands should be more proactive in planning for our future, and my point is that now is the time to look for alternative revenue streams.
A sales tax system is therefore an alternative that we should analyze and take into consideration as to whether we will benefit by adopting this system and discarding our import duty system.
My purpose for writing this and any other article is to stimulate real debate and to encourage this country to move away from where we are, and with the hope that each of us will contribute more to building a better society.
My suggestions are not perfect and I am sure they can be improved. Your critique is welcome!
Belize mulls decriminalizing ganja
(Caribbean Journal): Belize’s Ministry of National Security has appointed a committee to evaluate and make proposals for the decriminalization of small portions of marijuana. The move, which was announced this week, was driven by “increasing evidence that the current legislation clutters the courts and the prison with primarily a marginalized segment of our population,” the government said in a statement. The committee said that it recognized that the proposal was “a sensitive issue,” and encouraged interested groups and individuals to express their views on the matter. Belize’s current laws treat the possession of under 60 grams of marijuana as a criminal offence, punishable by a fine of up to $50,000 and/or up to three years imprisonment.
The decriminalization proposal would involve up to 10 grams of marijuana, which would then be subject to fines, mandatory drug education and no imprisonment. Also proposed would be the provision that no criminal record would be kept in the first instance, and portions of the penalty be reserved for drug education.
The committee emphasized that the proposal was “not to legalize the offence, thereby purging it of all its penalties,” however.
“It is merely to reduce and regulate,” the committee said. “This is further supported by international trends towards decriminalization.”
Not all referenda are equal
The referendum that took place yesterday was clearly inspired by the will of the people. It was also guided by a very hardworking group of people. However,it was NOT a people-initiated referendum within the meaning of section 70 of the Constitution. That may sound like an obscure point, but it has great significance in understanding what the vote count means.
The Constitution only provides for a threshold of 50% plus one of the registered voters under section 70, and it sets that threshold for a people-initiated referendum that is to be binding on government. All other referenda that are based on section 69 of the Constitution, and in section 69 of the Constitution there is no requirement for 50% plus one of registered voters. If there is anyone who doubts this, they should look at the 2009 Constitution which is available online.
The Constitution specifies that a people-initiated section 70 referendum can only take place after a petition has been submitted. The simple fact that the OMOV petition was never handed in to government prevents yesterday’s election from being a section 70 people-initiated referendum.
The government made a choice. They chose to make yesterday’s referendum a government sponsored section 69 referendum, rather than a people-initiated referendum, when they declared the referendum before any petition could be handed in. The government undoubtedly had their reasons for setting the timing of the referendum prior to the the OMOV initiative submitting their petition.
There is nothing wrong with the government calling a referendum, but it is inappropriate for government to attempt to confuse the public's understanding of the requirements of the Constitution. Any suggestion by the government that a government sponsored referendum requires the support of 50% plus one of registered voters, rather than a simple majority of those casting votes, is simply not based on anything in the Constitution.
There is simply no requirement in section 69 of the Constitution for anything other than a majority of those voting to pass a referendum. It could even be argued that as yesterday’s referendum was a government referendum and the government was clearly advocating that people vote NO, then the government lost the referendum as a clear majority of those voting rejected the government’s position.
There is also no basis in the Constitution for any suggestion by those seeking to spin the result that the number of people not voting should somehow be counted as invisible votes in favour of the government’s position. Not voting counts for nothing in the Constitution.
The government of the day may choose to say that they will not be bound by a YES vote of less than 50% of those registered to vote, or 50% of those that drive Volvos, or any percentage of anything else they choose. As the elected government and sponsors of a referendum they can choose any threshold they want for whatever purposes they choose. That does not change the fact that government sponsored referenda are to be counted on the basis of those voting, not those on the electoral register. That was what was done in the Constitution referendum of 2009.
It may be that the government’s spin doctors and so-called experts will now try to confuse the issue and the people by suggesting that the OMOV initiative somehow failed. That is simply not the case, according to the Constitution or on any realistic measure of what the people want. Spinning the result is politrix, it does not change what the Constitution says.
Approximately two-thirds of those voting in the referendum were in favour of the concept of one person one vote and single member constituencies. That is very good news. As a Caymanian I would like to thank everyone involved in the OMOV initiative for their efforts on behalf of democracy in this country. It is my sincere hope that they will keep up their efforts. Their selfless work to make Cayman better is a true inspiration.
It’s not a deal, Mr Premier, it’s a steal
On the local radio on June 19th, 2012 the premier was poking fun at our group for opposing the giving away of a section of our West Bay Road. He compared the situation to a man selling a car for $2,000, the buyer refurbishing the car and then reselling it for $5,000. The premier asked “Are you going to ask for the $3,000 profit he made on the car?”
No, Mr Premier, that is a poor analogy. The buyer spent money to refurbish the car and making a profit of $3,000 is his due. However, when the developer gets the title to the Crown Land, that is the 4,290 feet of West Bay Road, he immediately gets $600 million in his pocket without doing any upgrading, construction or refurbishing of his property that he owns on the land side of the road. Being in the real estate business yourself, Mr Bush, surely you will admit that the value of Seven Mile Beach land depends on its depth from the beach/high water mark to its boundary with the West Bay Road.
It therefore follows that the simple act of combining the width of the West Bay Road with the developer’s beach parcels increases the value of those parcels significantly. Just think what happens value-wise when those enlarged beach parcels are then also combined with the developer’s landside property: his property will all then be marketed as beachfront property because it will stretch from the Seven Mile Beach high water mark, across the closed section of West Bay Road, through his Stan Thomas acquisitions including the Yacht Club, and all the way to the [western] boundary of the Esterly Tibbetts Highway and its extension to Batabano Road. The resulting combination of parcels will immediately at least triple (or more) in value as he will now sell his residential lots as beachfront property!
How did we come up with the above figure of $600 million? Two studies were done by reputable real estate agents on the value of that same West Bay Road in the vicinity of the Public Beach and the Old Courtyard Marriot Hotel. One was done in March 2010 and the other in early 2011. They showed that for every 500 feet of property on the landside the value of the property was increased by $70 million once they acquired the West Bay Road to now become beachfront property. The length of the road that the developer covets is not 2,500 feet, as they were misleading us for 9 months, but is actually 4,290 feet. 500 feet goes into 4290 feet 8.58 times and when multiplied by $70 million gives a total of $600.6 million that the developer will be getting immediately once he gets the title to that section of the road.
Wemust also add the value of the road itself that isprime, world famous Seven Mile Beach property – priceless.
This road is 4,290 feet in length and 70 feet wide, which gives a total of 300,300 square feet. We wonder what amount the developer told the PricewaterhouseCoopers reviewers that this road was worth since it appears he is calling all the shots. We also wonder what length of road the PWC review was assessing. Was it the 2,500 feet which is worth a lot less that the actual 4,290 feet? How independent was the review by PWC when only the developer and the government made submissions? Objectors and other interested persons were not allowed to do so.
We have not been able to get to see the NRA Agreement that was signed on December 15th, 2011. We applied on a couple of occasions using the Freedom of Information Act to get copies of this “deal” but we were denied.
Thankfully, as a copy has this week come into the possession of Mr Ezzard Miller it has now been brought out into the public domain. What transparency! Talk about secrecy! Keeping the public in the dark for 7 months and they talk about good governance? Is the PWC review going to take the same route of secrecy and keeping the public in the dark?
In the deal the developer is also getting about 75 acres in Barkers and another 73 acres of Crown Land in Salt Creek. He is getting at least $45 million in tax concessions and Room Tax Exemption for 10 years after the hotel is built. He is also getting the re-zoning of 45 acres of mangrove land behind Camana Bay so that he can fill with marl and sell as residential lots. The extension of Esterley Tibbetts Highway up to Batabano Road will open up his land in that area making it even more valuable. In addition, moving the dump away from his proposed residential lots will increase the value of his Camana Bay property in that area.
When all is added up the developer is getting over $1,000 million. In return he is giving ~$100 million over the next 25 years. We are getting the extension of the Esterley Tibbetts highway ($33 million), moving the dump ($26 million), $5 million (for community projects), $4 million (for supplemental budget), land clearing jobs, show gutting hotel and lately a cemetery (in the swamp) in West Bay, a Sunrise Centre and a mini Public Beach.
So Mr Premier, where is the value for money? You are giving away the country’s assets worth over $1,000 million and in exchange Cayman is getting $100 million. How on heaven’s earth can you call this a ‘fantastic deal’? This you have said on numerous occasions when you referred to Caymanians who oppose this deal as idiots. The For Cayman Investment Alliance (FCIA) should be renamed the For Dart Investment Alliance (FDIA) or simply “THE STEAL”.
Why is it that the deal is constantly being altered? Just a few days ago we heard of some more projects that the developer was undertaking as part of this deal. Is it because the independent review team of PWC has obviously seen that there is not value for money and someone has recommended to the developer to throw in a few more trinkets into the pot so that the deal looks a little bit fairer? Even with these few additions the developer is getting 10 times what he is giving which is grossly unfair.
It is a shame and a disgrace that we have a greedy developer coming to the Cayman Islands and sees our beautiful West Bay Road and decides that he wants 4,290 feet for himself and he has no regard for the Caymanians who built that road over 100 years ago and have used it ever since. We need the Esterley Tibbetts Highway to complement the West Bay Road and not to replace it. He can also build his hotel with an overhead pass just like the Ritz Carlton and Hyatt did previously. He does not just want the 500 feet of West Bay Road in front of the Old Courtyard Marriot, which was the excuse first used in giving him the section of West Bay Road, but wants 4,290 feet. This extra amount of road is for futurespeculation. What a disgrace!
It is even more disgraceful and shameful that we have a desperate government, so hell bent on starting a project to go into the upcoming elections that they see nothing wrong in giving away so much valuable assets that belong to the people of the Cayman Islands to this developer for little or nothing. The people were never consulted on this deal. We were only informed that it was taking place. “You not stopping me. This project is going ahead,” the premier said at a meeting at Mary Miller Hall June 2011. The developer is getting the bank and all the gold and money inside it and in exchange he is giving the government a pouch full of pennies in return. What a STEAL!
The government only listens to their supporters and pays no regard to the rest of us who do not agree with the government’s projects that are not in the best interests of the country. If the developer so loves Caymanians and that he is doing these projects for us why does he not leave our West Bay Road alone and stop buying up all the existing Crown Lands for himself. Who has given the developer the permission to acquire such extensive tracts of Crown Land all over Grand Cayman? Was due process adhered to in these transactions?
Morally, environmentally, economically and culturally this project is wrong. This project had its beginning in the previous UDP administration of 2001 – 2005. They amended laws to suit the plans for this project – the Vesting of Crown Lands Law etc. In June 2011 the project was shoved down our throats. No one was going to change the government’s mind. What is even more frightening is that we still do not know all the details of this deal, the facets of this very complex deal are constantly changing and we dare say that not even the government knows what is going on or what they are actually getting as of now.
We say to you Caymanians wake up before it is too late. Wake up before your environment is permanently destroyed and your beaches, your lands, your businesses and your way of life are all taken away from you, forever.
What will we tell our children thirty years from now when they come asking us: “What did you do to stop this wanton destruction of our environment, our protective mangroves? Why did you not stop the wholesale giving away of our Crown lands, our assets, our rights to our beaches and our roads to the extent that nothing was left for us and our children?” All we will be able to do is bow our heads in shame and regret.
To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards out of men.
Wake up Cayman!
Closing George Town dump – ignoring the perfect solution
Recently, Minister Mark Scotland was on a local talk show, once again reminding us that the real reason we need to close the George Town dump is that we simply cannot afford to keep it there. He also spent lot of time trying to dispel the belief that Wheelabrator had presented government with a perfect solution that was being ignored.
I found his comments to be quite interesting, because the arguments currently in circulation in favor of keeping the dump in George Town is that the waste could simply be mined down and burned to create energy, thus dismantling the mountain, producing free electricity and preventing the contamination of a new site. On the surface this seems to make sense; however, as Minister Scotland who, apart from being the representative for Bodden Town is also an engineer, clearly explained, if it was that simple, waste-to-energy would have happened by now.
According to Minister Scotland, the last government hired consultants to help them figure out if waste-to-energy was worth pursuing at George Town dump, and although the consultants agreed that it was possible, they apparently raised some very significant challenges in their report, which remain central to the current debate.
According to what I understood from the minister’s comments, the consultants said it would take about $120 million to get the new system set up, and then it would require on-going annual funding of about $20 million for operation.
They also estimated that two-thirds of the waste buried deep inside Mt Trashmore was not suitable for burning in a waste to energy plant, and went on to say that mining the waste to separate out its burnable components would be very slow and take about 20 years.
According to Minister Scotland, the consultants also advised that government would need to buy more land next to the dump to locate the waste to energy plant. As he put it, “Government simply does not have the money to do this.”
However, despite these obvious challenges, there are many who still believe that Wheelabrator, a big profit-driven US company, could somehow step in and magically present us with an affordable, timely, space saving plan to pump power out of Mt. Trashmore.
According to CNS andthe people on Rooster, Wheelabrator “had provided all the required elements to successfully complete the project and a comprehensive breakdown of their approach.” If that were true, then details have certainly never been made public. But if you insist on believing that line, I have a goldmine in Cayman Brac that I want to sell you.
It is obvious to me that waste-to-energy at the George Town dump would be a waste of money because any sustainable solution to Cayman’s waste problems must rest on the introduction of a comprehensive island-wide recycling program so that another landfill mountain doesn’t simply pile up.
Anything else would be a waste. Determining exactly what government’s plans are for the recycling component of a new facility is where our actions should be targeted.
This, my friends is the perfect solution that is being constantly ignored.
OMOV, a layman’s point of view
One Man One Vote (OMOV ), in my opinion, will not be the panacea that will solve all our problems. What it will do is it will cause a slight, but very important, power shift in three areas of politics in Cayman. This shift, in all cases, will be in favor of the people, the electorate. The first of these areas is the balance of power between the politicians and the people.
In recent administrations we have seen our elected officials, once they are elected, seem to forget the people and do as they please with little or no consultation from the people. As if the attitude is, you elected me now leave me alone, if you don’t like what I do talk to me in four years.
They seem to forget that they were elected to do our will, not their will. With the smaller one man constituencies it will be harder for the politician to hide behind the numbers, passing responsibility back and forth. They will know who elected them and there will be no question in the minds of the voters exactly who they elected and who they need to, and can, hold accountable. This will not be a larger power shift towards the people but a significant one. It will be a shift that a politician who truly wants to work for the people will welcome and that the ones who are in politics for their personal gain will fight with all their might.
The second area is that of allegiance or loyalty. We are all aware of what many call the ‘coattail effect’, when a candidate slides into office on the coat tails of the party or stronger party candidates. These are the politicians that generally you hear little from but they are always there voting the “party line”. Who do you think they owe their CI$ 100,000.00 paycheck to? Who do you think they are going to be more loyal too, the people or the party/leader with the “coat tails”?
I think we have seen over the years it is the coattails in both cases. OMOV will help to separate these individuals from the party a bit and pressure them into answering to their electorate, thereby forcing them to be stronger representatives. Some fear this will weaken the party system; although that might not be a bad thing, I do not believe that will be the case. In fact it may make them stronger and in a good way. It will do this by giving us stronger leaders across the board. Not weak ‘yes’ men.
Once again, from this aspect a politician who truly wants to work for the people will welcome this change and the ones who are in politics for their personal gain will fight it with all their might.
The final shift will be a shift in importance, a shift in the balance between the importance of the party and the country. OMOV will, over time, cause a shift in the mindset of the elected officials. Since they will be moreaccountable to the people they will look to use the party to help the country. Now it seems they have been using the country to strengthen the party. The country is and always should be #1, not the party. Once again from this aspect also, a politician who truly wants to work for the people will welcome this change and the ones who are in politics for their personal gain will fight it with all their might.
Many are saying all is fine, “it’s not broke, we don’t need to fix it!” (Not so many years ago in history the ruling class said that about slavery). But if we do not make the change now it will break, and if it does it will not be easily fixed. The time is now. It has been talked about and kicked around over the years and many respected individual s over that period have endorsed it. Today individuals and organizations from all aspects of Cayman life are supporting it. I ask you to look at who it is opposing it; have they proven to you by their leadership that their main priority is the wellbeing of the people for the Cayman Islands?
One Man One Vote will not change things overnight. What One Man One Vote will do is to cause these slight balance shifts in the favor of the people. This will give us a stronger government, stronger more receptive political parties, it will give us stronger representation. It will empower our representative to work on our behalf and mandate them to do just that. It is about a slight shift of power in favor of the people. I can only surmise that those who oppose it do not want to give up any of their power, and that by itself speaks volumes.
Agree or disagree please vote July 18th. Let’s make sure we have a true read of the wishes of the people.
To those who agree remember: the only thing that can defeat us is apathy. Please take the personal responsibility to be the one to push it over the top. Make sure you vote Yes on July 18th.
Related point of view:
Why we needed One Man, One Vote YESTERDAY
A response to “Now is Not the Time for OMOV”
by Darlin’ and Sweetheart
Accountability in OMOV and SMC
As we draw nearer to the Referendum on 18 July 2012, much has beensaid concerning one man, one vote (OMOV) in single-member constituencies (SMC) and the attendant equality of voters. Therefore, by now, everyone with an open mind probably understands what is meant by voter equality. However, it is the issue of accountability that seems somewhat elusive and is being complicated by the anti-OMOV rhetoric of opponents.
Accountability should not be confused with equality in the number of registered voters in an SMC. It is about the quality of representation and not the number of voters represented.
Therefore, a representative has an obligation and should be willing to give satisfactory reasons to his or her constituents for any actions he or she may take while serving as their representative. With an SMC one can safely say that a representative has little choice but to be responsive to their constituents simply because there is no one else to blame for their actions or lack thereof.
A case in point is the ForCayman Investment Alliance between the Cayman Islands Government (CIG) and Dart Realty. Whether you are in favour of or opposed to the proposed closure of part of the West Bay Road or the movement of the landfill to Bodden Town, it is evident that approximately four thousand residents, primarily those in the three larger multi-member constituencies (MMC), believe their interests were ignored by their representatives. They contend that this only occurred because they account for a minority of the votes in each MMC. In other words, in each MMC, they are merely a voice within the crowd.
Now contrast the above with East End and North Side. Having only one representative each because of the smaller number of registered voters, they in fact each operate as an SMC where a smaller population enables everyone in those districts to become a name and a face within the community where their vote matters and, consequently, their voice matters.
Therefore, when the residents of those districts opposed the East End Seaport in 2011, as it was perceived by residents that it would adversely affect both districts, their elected representatives had no choice but to join the fight. What justifiable reason could they give for abstaining from involvement? Therefore, if the current polling divisions of George Town North, West Bay South and Bodden Town were each an SMC when the CIG and Dart Realty deal was proposed the representative of each SMC would have had no choice but to canvass the views of their constituentsas to the perceived pros and cons and then represent accordingly.
Consequently, in an SMC each voter has a single, easily identifiable, district representative who has no opportunity for passing the buck. This encourages a stronger connection between representative and constituent, which itself enhances accountability. He or she is therefore more likely to be responsive to his or her constituents than to their party. Furthermore, incumbent politicians in an SMC tend to be difficult for party leaders to remove, which gives them a degree of independence from their party.
While not putting it forward as their policy, opponents of OMOV have recently introduced the concept of a national vote where the first 18 candidates receiving the most votes would be declared the winners. Though not inconsistent with the use of one man, one vote and equality of voters, it would do nothing to improve accountability and responsibility. If it is possible to avoid accountability and responsibility at the district level it would be much easier to do so at a national level. It would also decrease the representativeness of the LA as it would no doubt be populated by candidates from the larger districts, leaving smaller districts with no representation. Furthermore, a national vote would do nothing to remedy the perception that introducing OMOV in an SMC will make our politics increasingly parochial. Therefore, a national vote would be counterproductive.
Another objection is that an SMC would be too small and allow elections to befixed. In fact there has been far more controversy regarding fair elections in the Cayman MMC than in any SMC.
Therefore, accountability is inextricably linked to responsibility. Accountability does not mean absolute and total perfection from a representative but it does demand that a representative be willing to provide justifiable reasons for their action or inaction. In an SMC with a smaller number of voters, the explanation is more likely to be forthcoming from the representative since no representative can afford the risk of losing any vote with so few available.
As a result, although the voters' ultimate recourse in an SMC and an MMC is to vote to change their elected representative at the end of an election cycle, the power of the voters in an SMC to compel their elected representative to act is greater. Thus an SMC gives the voters a better chance to effect change within an election cycle as opposed to once every four years.
From self-reliance to the loser-mentality
The Cayman generations of the 40’s 50’s and 60’s and before were world-renowned for their self reliance and tenacity in the face of adversity. The men were sometimes called ‘iron-men’ who mastered ‘wooden ships’ and later some of the world’s largest super tanker and ore carriers. The strength and resilience of the women were reflected in their management of their family’s affairs, their child rearing skills and their instilling of strong values in their children.
Self reliance and strength of moral character were a key part of the Cayman psyche.
That was then but this is now.
Update to the second decade of the 21st century and the 'loser-mentality' has enveloped almost every aspect of our society, from top to bottom.
The change came relatively quickly during the 70’s 80’s and 90’s as the financial, real estate and tourism industries exploded. Those generations were not prepared for the sudden inflow of wealth and the educational requirements to compete in this new society.
Successive British administrators and later elected governments failed to have the foresight to predict the future needs of the country and its people. Caymanians wanted and deserved to stay at home and enjoy the new found wealth in their own country, rather than to traverse the oceans as seamen.
The sale of our lands and beaches brought instant wealth to many – a wealth that only a few managed to invest wisely, and only a minority managed to acquire the aggressive skills and educational background necessary to survive in this new economy.
By the late 90’s a good proportion of the then-generation had managed to acquire better educational backgrounds, many by studying abroad. They returned home full of excitement and enthusiasm only to find out that those who had helped to create the tourism, legal and financial industries were not as welcoming to locals into these industries as the locals had earlier welcomed them to Cayman to establish themselves and these industries in the country.
As the economic boom diminished, it is not surprising that discontent and crime increased rapidly as it has in the local population in the past 20 years.
We are at the beginning of the second decade of a new century and our situation has deteriorated beyond belief. Those that we welcomed to our country now own the best beaches, the best homes, the best jobs, and control the wealth that Caymanians believed theydeserve and would have received.
There are many factors that brought us to where we are. So who do we blame for our plight? There is plenty of blame to go around, but the blame-game is a road that has no end, and will go on forever, and it will accomplish nothing but hatred and disharmony in the society.
My suggestion is that we blame no particular group or party. We stop targeting others for our misfortune. We examine where we are and look back at how we got here, but don’t waste our time or energy blaming others.
We need to look at ourselves individually and ask: ‘Do we still have any moral values? Do we have any pride left in our being? Are we self-reliant like our forefathers? Do we have the attitude that we can change the plight of our family and our country? How do we improve our own lives and the lives of those around us?’
As I said at the beginning, the loser-mentality has a stronghold in our society. Our moral character and spirit of self-reliance has for the most part been buried with our grand-parents and parents.
A large section of our population will apparently sell our souls for a few dollars, a new appliance here, a promise of a job there, a financial benefit or other gift in exchange for your vote. A special relationship with government that benefits ourselves, but we know that it is at the expense of the society generally.
These benefits of getting something for nothing, of gaining at the expense of our country, of a special deal that puts us at an advantage over our competitors are, my friends, the underbelly of corruption.
It does not matter how poor you are or how rich you are, YOU ARE A LOSER if you accept gifts from someone, whether it be a dollar or a special contract, in exchange for anything that benefits yourself and that someone in a position of trust.
We need to rise above this, otherwise our society will become so embedded with corruption that there will be no hope for our children’s future. We will become dependent on the bearer of gifts who have ulterior motives that will eventually harm us more than it helped us.
The greatest harm of all is that our moral values and spirit of self reliance will become just a memory of the greatest part of who we were, a long time ago.
We can do better than this, my friends. Start by not being tricked into believing that we can get something for nothing. We can individually rebuild our values and self- reliance one step at a time – no matter how poor or rich we are.