Guest Writer

Rap not cause of crime

While all types of violent music have some negative influence on young people, I would not go as far to say that it prompts one to commit serious crimes. I also think making such comments (as those made by the police commissioner recently) discredits all the hard work and commitment that persons such as local rapper and recent Grammy award nominee, Jason Gilbert, and his group “The iZ” and others like D.L.S. have accomplished.

Rap music has come a long way since the 1980’s and early 90’s when “gangster” rap music was much more popular. Many rap artists these days are actually entrepreneurs, often wearing business suits, most having their own clothing line, fragrances and record labels. A few even have ownership in professional basketball teams (NBA). Hip Hop artist Jay-Z was recently featured in Forbes magazine alongside billionaire Warren Buffet. Although most focus on wealth and fame, I think they also inspire young people to do something positive with their lives and to dream big.

There are a number of things that contribute to our young people committing crimes and rap music, in my opinion, is not the main reason. I am not suggesting that parents allow their children to listen to violent music, but not all rap music is bad. I personally feel that the main reason for the increase of crime among our youth today is the breakdown of the family and society’s lack of patience and tolerance in grooming our youth.

Looking on the Economics and Statistics website, it showed that in 2009 Cayman had 232 filed divorces and in 2008, 196 divorces were granted, the highest in 24 and 23 years respectively. Any single parent can tell you how hard it is to raise a family on their own, whether it is financially, physically or mentally.

I read a study online by Heritage Foundation (www.heritage.org) that said: “The absence of the father is the single most important cause of crime and the percentage of single-parent households with children between the ages of 12 and 20 is significantly associated with rates of violent crime and burglary.” Material things can be replaced, but a great father missing from home is irreplaceable.

Many studies show that the breakdown within the home can be detrimental to young people, causing many to commit crimes. If you do not believe in the studies, just look around and watch from experience. Where do young men learn to assault women? Many times they see it happen growing up right in their own home. Where do young people pick up drug and alcohol habits? From their parents, relatives or persons close around them — actually many teens have admitted that their first alcohol drink came from their parents.

Young people not working or attending full time school is another cause which bolsters crime.
We all know that idleness and too much free time causes young people to get into mischief.
I think poor modeling also has an impact on our youth: every person on earth has thesocial responsibility to be a good role model within the community. However, a lot of the bad habits that our young people pick up, they pick up from adults — foul language, selfishness, anger, negativity, just to name a few.

I think the lack of positive role models within our community also has an effect on our youth.
A recent poll done by Gallup/USA Today showed President Barack Obama to be the “Most Admired Man” for the 3rd straight year. Whether you like him or not, it is evident that he is a family man and demonstrates and conducts himself in a very professional and admirable manner, which is very appealing to the younger generation.

The reason we have so many young people looking abroad and being influenced from overseas is because of the lack of role models here in Cayman. I am not saying we don’t have some in Cayman — I personally know several of them — but it is not to a magnitude of what is really needed. We need more role models and leaders who stand out, Caymanian role models and leaders, who aspire to inspire this new generation.

We as a nation need to start encouraging our children more and instilling positive things into their minds on a consistent basis; it has a negative influence on them when all they hear is negative things. I do not think we encourage our children enough to dream big, think positive, instill into them that they can do anything they put their minds to. Growing up I did not have much confidence in myself until other people took notice of my potential and started encouraging me, and I suspect many young people are going through the same thing today.

When I attended school, I recall one teacher telling me that I wouldn’t become anything. I also had people comparing me to family members who had certain addictions. We need to let our children know that their past, neighborhood, race, wealth or educational background does not affect their future.

Not to my surprise, the same study done by the Heritage Foundation, which I truly believe to be accurate, stated that “Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods.” I do not think that anyone can argue that the principles and morals that Christianity teaches us have been diminishing within our community.

Many of our elders will tell you that Cayman has changed significantly, and although I believe in change, there are just some things, such as our moral integrity, personal responsibility and community involvement, that should not change.

I call upon families, fathers in particular, to take your rightful place in society, to shelter your sons and daughters from destroying themselves. Teach them the right morals and principles that will help them to be successful in life and help build their characters, that will not allow them to bend under negative influence. These things cannot be taught in colleges or universities but can only be obtained within a loving home. In doing so, we will build a stronger community in the fight against crime, both locally and internationally.

Richard Christian is the president of the Young United Democratic Party (YUDP) and was responding to comments made by Police Commissioner David Baines in a presentation at the Caribbean Conference on Economic Co-operation held at the Ritz Carlton last month.

Continue Reading

View from the southeast corner

The article written by Brent Fuller and published in The Compass on Wednesday, 8th December 2010, under the headline “Closed-door FOI review set” and further subtitled “FOI Commissioner wants key role” in my view carried several inaccurate statements and was written in a style that would lead readers to believe something sinister was being done.

Let me deal with each inaccurate statement in turn.

1. In the first line of the article the author make the statement: “It appears the legal review of Cayman’s first Freedom of Information Law will not be done before the eyes of the public."

The author of this article was present in the press box when the premier moved the motion several months ago, in public, to establish this committee of the whole House with Madam Speaker as chairman, in accordance with the FOI law. The FOI law states in Section 58 (1): "This Law shall be reviewed from time to time by a committee of the Legislative Assembly appointed for that purpose," and in subsection (2): "The first such review shall be conducted not later than eighteen months after the appointed day."

The Legislative Assembly Standing Orders (2006 revision) lays down specific rules in sections 70,71,72, 73 & 74 that all select committees are expected to follow, and section 73 subsection (4) says: “The proceedings of and the evidence taken before any select committee and any documents presented thereto, and decisions of such a committee shall not be published by any Member thereof or by any other person until after the Committee has presented its report to the House."

In my view this statement is a deliberate misrepresentation of the truth and is an offence under section 18 (2) a. of the Immunities, Powers and Privileges law (IPP).

2.The author continues: “A six-member Legislative Assembly subcommittee is scheduled to begin meeting ‘in camera’ — privately — this month to review Cayman’s Freedom of Information law."

This statement is also inaccurate as it is not meeting in camera (privately). This subcommittee is bound to conduct its affairs in accordance with Standing Orders.

In my view this statement is also a deliberate misrepresentation of the truth because the truth is known to the author, and the statements is an offence under section 18 (2) a. of the Immunities, Powers and Privileges Law.

3.The editorial goes even further, when in the first paragraph it reads: “We suppose someone in the ‘secret’ subcommittee that we guess is going to be deciding the fate of Cayman’s Freedom of Information law will say something like this over the coming weeks …”

In my view this is also a deliberate misstatement of fact as no subcommittee nor select committee can make any decisions as to the fate of the FOI law. All either committee can do is make recommendations in a report that will be tabled and therefore made public. The only body that can make any changes to the existing FOI law is the Legislative Assembly, either by government presenting an amending bill of a private bill or by a non-government bill, both of which is done in public with the press present.

In my view, this is a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts that should be known to the newspaper and is an offence against the IPP law.

4.The editorial goes on to say in paragraph three: “in attempts to head off this foolishness — since we haven’t been invited to participate in any hearings of this secret body …”

This in my view is also is an offence under section 18 (2) c. as I believe it touches the conduct of members when they are accused of doing foolishness.

5.The worst statement in the editorial reads: “ It is in fact the direct opposite of what is supposed to occur under the FOI law."

The deliberate accusation that the subcommittee and the select committee is in contravention of the FOI law is untrue and the Legislative Assembly acted in full compliance of the FOI law in establishing the select committee, and the select committee acted within its remit to establish the subcommittee. In my view this is also a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts and that the truth was known to the author, and that it is an offense under section 18 (2) a of the IPP law.

Now having read the article and the editorial and being contacted by several friendly and not so friendly supporters accusing me of being a part of tampering with the FOI law in secret, I had three choices an a member of the Legislative Assembly: ignore the article and editorial and do nothing, use the privilege provided me by the IPP law to attack and castigate the author and The Compass, or use the process provided me as a member under the IPP law to have the Attorney General decide if the parties should be prosecuted before a court of law and let the Court decide if guilty and what punishment should be handed down.

Far too often in this country of late we are content in our accommodating culture to let our institutions be attacked and degraded with no response. The fact that we tolerate and often acquire to the statement that Caymanians are lazy, can’t learn, and the high level of crime that is tolerated because we stand by and ignore the perpetrators and refuse to report them to the police and other authorities. I believe it is time to act and stop ignoring the obvious.

The second choice is not part of my modus operandi as a politician, so it was not open to me. I sit in my southeast corner of the Legislative Assembly with disgust as members, institutions like the press and members of the public are attacked with immunity. I find it almost laudable that the darlings of the press and media are the four members who voted against the motion, several of whom had the most critical and uncomplimentary things to say about the paper and the author. I did not criticize or castigate either The Compass or the author of the article; I simply gave the reasons for bringing the motion and asked the Legislative Assembly to take certain actions.

I chose the third option open to me to begin to defend our institutions and re-establish certain standards. I chose to move a motion of Privilege and ask the Attorney General to prosecute the reporter and The Compass under the provisions of section 18 and 19 of the IPP law and for Madam Speaker to cancel the press privilege of the author immediately.

This is what I do whenever I believe a citizen or resident has broken any of Cayman’s Laws: I report them to the relevant authorities and asked that they be prosecuted under the relevant or appropriate law. Normally such reports and request are done through the police. This option was not open to me in the Legislative Assembly so I made the request directly to the Attorney General.

Had I not done my duty, because in my view these infractions of the law were committed by the press, I would have no moral authority to tell any constituent member not to steal, exceed the speed limit or smoke ganja, for that matter.

The process which will follows is the normal one. The Attorney General will decide if there is a case to answer and, if there is, proceed to a court of law for the court to decide if they are guilty and to hand down the appropriate sentence, as provided for in the IPP law. Neither the Legislative Assembly nor I can decide, nor can the Legislative Assembly instruct the Attorney General who to prosecute.

On a further point, there are those who say that the select committee could decide to hold its deliberations in public by suspending Standing Orders. This is not so. A select committee cannot suspend any Standing Orders; only the Legislative Assembly when sitting can suspend Standing Orders by majority vote.

Oh, by the way, if the editor wants to contribute or be a part of the review, all they have to do is make a written submission and/or request an audience with the subcommittee to discuss their issues with the law and they will be treated in accordance with Standing Orders.

I fully understand in our democracy the pen is mightier than the sword and that it was not “good politics” to bring this motion, as is evidenced by the blogs and the more recent publications in the media. However, I am not one who is easily intimidated by the media, although in my thirty years around politics in Cayman I have endured my share of threats and ridicule by the media.

In my view, this is about a principle of respect for the workings of our Legislative Assembly and the members elected to that high office. The people have chosen the fifteen members in a proper electoral process to represent them and have the trust and belief that they will do what is best for Cayman and its people and any article written with such a slant that in my view appears to erode that trust or question the motives based on inaccurate statements should be challenged within the rules using due process of law.

Continue Reading

So what’s in your package?

Having woken this morning full of the excitement and glee I once had on Christmas mornings anticipating the arrival of Santa, excited to read the premier’s stimulus package, imagine my disappointment. Feeling so dejected I looked up the word stimulus in the dictionary to make sure it was not my poor education that had led me to believe that ‘stimulus’ meant something a little exciting that would get us all going — a little incentive, but I was not wrong.

While it will be nice for my Chinese friends to come and visit this New Year and for my tight fisted, mean and rather distant 93-year-old great uncle to come live here for 25 years, I don’t feel terribly stimulated by the news. And, of course, having my mortgage principle payments frozen for a few months would be nice if I banked with Cayman National, but as I don’t I’ll just have to settle for the month’s grace we usually get over Christmas anyway.

I did for the minute feel a twinge of stimulation at the mention of duty reductions but sadly I’m not sure what the premier intends to offer in his duty free package so I don’t know what to go out and buy. And to be honest, now I know there might just be a bit of a discount coming soon I shan’t bother going shopping again until I know what it is. I mean, I would hate to go out and buy a new flat screen TV next week only to find I could have got 27% off if I’d waited. I do loathe missing a bargain, don’t you?

And, of course, my cousin is delighted to be working on the clean-up programme, but he said that he was hoping there might be something indoors after Christmas because, being an accountant, his hands get terribly chapped when he does yard work.

Oh, and possibly, maybe, perhaps, the reduction in stamp duty might help things for my niece who’s getting married soon and would like to move out of the tent she is living in with her boyfriend because his feet smell (which is not so bad because they do stick out the end of the tent) but she’ll just have to wait and see.

Now, don’t get me wrong. It’s not that I don’t think Mr Premier tried his best but I think maybe the 250 suggestions from the dozen or so organisations must have all been a bit rubbish and he’s picked the best that they had to offer. I mean, what can he do if no one’s got any good ideas?

And he has offered another exciting countdown for us when he said that in the first quarter of 2011 a “promotional strategy” to bring in that financial “physical presence” which means we can now start counting down to 30 March (110 days this time — a bit longer than the last one). How exciting!

The big one, though, really does appear to be how under the premier’s “stewardship” the new high schools project will be starting again. Now that was truly stimulating! Hundreds of jobs and business opportunities. A little Keynesian perhaps — government spending money to get the economy going — but crikey, imagine how stimulated we’d all feel now if that had happened a year ago. But let’s not look a gift horse in the mouth, eh?

Let’s face it, we are all different and one man’s stimulus package could be another man’s damp squib. But hey! Who am I to criticize …?

Happy Christmas, bloggers.

Continue Reading