THE ESSENCE OF POLITICS (By Colville Petty)

fter a storm comes a calm. Like the calm that followed the political storm of the February 2005 general elections. That is the pattern of Anguilla’s political weather. After general elections our people go into a deep slumber. They allow the Government to execute its campaign promises without its members having to look over their shoulders. According to Kenneth Harrigan (1994), after elections “politics is over until five years.” That rule is generally true.

This year, 2005, is an exception. The Labour Code Bill aside, the Physical Planning Bill has broken the calm. The people were awakened from their political slumber once they became aware of its implications. Land is a very emotive subject in Anguilla. The easiest way to make the point is to quote a woman at one of the recent town hall meetings: “Dem could take my man, but not my land! Dem could take my man, but leave my land!”

It is against that type of mentality that any law which attempts to interfere with the people’s freedom to use or dispose of their land is a declaration of war. A majority of Anguillian people saw the Physical Planning Bill as a declaration of war.

In fact that declaration seemed to have been decided upon some four years ago because the Physical Planning Bill 2001, as its title implies, was around since 2001. But some of our political leaders were fearful of its consequences and got cold feet. So it was not until Tuesday 8th June 2004 that the Bill came back to the House of Assembly when its further consideration was postponed amidst much controversy. The Opposition and the Second Nominated Member (Claudel Romney) opposed several of its principal provisions. They condemned it strongly. And, according to Edison Baird (Leader of the Opposition at the time), Chief Minister Osbourne Fleming was one of the Bill’s strongest critics. To complicate matters, there was much dissension in the ranks of Government itself over certain provisions of the Bill.

The Bill resurfaced, somewhat mysteriously, in the House on 23rd August. And it seems as though it was the Chief Minister’s longstanding discomfort with it that caused him to suggest that debate on it be postponed to give the Anguillian people an opportunity to study it and make recommendations accordingly. To quote a Press Release from his office on 5th October: “. . . It was on his advice in the House of Assembly on 23rd August 2005 that the Bills were brought back to the community for additional comments . . .”

What is most puzzling, though, is how come the Bill reached the House of Assembly even though the Chief Minister was strongly opposed to it and that it had bothered his conscience very much. That should never have had happened. I should point out that when it reached the House on Tuesday 8th June 2004 he was noticeably absent. Nashville Webster once said (1985) that one cannot say that Osbourne was soft because “even though he may shake a little bit . . . he’ll come back.”

I can appreciate the Chief Minister Fleming’s position in having the debate on the Bill postponed. He was not happy with it, so he found it impossible to lead the debate on its merits? A question which must follow is: Who is the prime mover behind the Bill and why?

Notwithstanding that, the Bill does have its merits and demerits. Indeed there is need for regulations to assist in the proper development of our land resources. Our development should not be haphazard. But the Bill is repulsive when it comes to those provisions which are in grave conflict with the culture – the way of life – of the Anguillian people. It fails to appreciate the unique way of life of our people. And that is exactly what the people who marched, in protest, on the Chief Minister’s Office on Tuesday 4th October, told the Chief Minister: “The spirit, text and tenor of the Bill is an anathema to Anguilla’s way of life, culture, spirit and identity . . . We are shocked that our elected members of Government could even contemplate passage of such a Bill that is so foreign to Anguilla’s way of life, needs and circumstances.”

The Bill is indeed a non-belonger of Anguilla. Many people liked how Sheriff described its origin of birth when he spoke at the town hall meeting at the Teachers’ Resource Centre on 15th September. Listen to him: “When I look at this draft I really, really, must say that this Bill was not conceived in no way, shape nor form by Anguillians . . . This Bill was copied from the internet – from a Zimbabwe website somewhere and just use a filter to say replace the word Zimbabwe with Anguilla and then given to us . . . Any right thinking Anguillian could never defend a Bill like this.”

There is no doubt that the Physical Planning Bill is alien to Anguilla. Its several unwarranted restrictions on people’s use of their land, including how they dispose, divide and develop it, are unacceptable. Take for example the provision which requires a certificate of completion before one could begin to live in one’s house. That provision goes against the core of Anguilla’s culture with respect to the building of homes. It is the dream of every Anguillian to build a home. Because of financial constraints, they have a history of building their homes in stages. They put down the foundation and keep building as money comes to hand. As soon as one or two rooms are finished they move in. Little by little they build until the house is finally completed to their satisfaction. Sometimes this takes many years but for sure the banks do not take their homes. Any legislation which attempts to put an end to that tradition has to be resisted.

Government has suffered significant political fallout from the Bill. But I have a feeling that if the town hall meetings were chaired by the Chief Minister the fallout may have been significantly less. They were chaired by Minister of Finance Victor Banks who is supportive of the Bill and who angered the participants by the way he conducted the sessions. Had they been chaired by the Chief Minister he probably would have said to the participants that you and I are singing from the same hymn sheet and that he welcomes their input, the results of which would be reflected in a new draft Bill.

Victor’s handling of the meetings was somewhat confrontational and that was why all hell broke loose at the town hall meeting at Road School on 22nd September. Actually, Victor cut it short saying that the meetings as a whole were serving no useful purpose. But Kennedy Hodge was quick to point out that they were indeed useful because they allowed him (Banks) to hear the views of the people and to get a feel of the intensity of their resentment of the Bill. And now my two pence: the meetings provided a glimpse at potential political leaders. For example, we have to look out for Mitchell Lake in 2010 and Nakishma Rogers later on.

The meetings were extremely useful because it brought Government to the realisation that opposition to the Bill stretched across party lines. Party lines were blurred, perhaps for the first time in our recent political history. It was perhaps that show of unity, bipartisan support and opposition to the Bill which convinced Government that indeed there was a strong case for having a serious look at amending it. Actually, by the third town meeting, out of the planned series of four, the Government had got the message and therefore called off the meeting planned for West End, much to the anger of its residents who conducted their own meeting to express opposition against the Bill.

It was out of that meeting that the idea of a march on the Chief Minister’s Office, to which I referred earlier, originated. Having listened to the marchers, the Chief Minister assured them that: “. . . The Planning Bill and the Labour Code Bill will not go to the House of Assembly until the people of Anguilla are satisfied” with its provisions. He had sought their views and was left in no doubt about where they stood on the matter.

I must mention here that a word of appreciation is in order for our local lawyers who were extremely helpful in providing a better understanding of the provisions of the Bill. Without their expertise our people and some members of government would have been none the wiser of its full implications. Our lawyers must be congratulated. Ralph Hodge (of ANSA) agrees. I heard him on To The Point (a weekly Talk Show on103.3 FM Radio), on Monday night 10th October, saying that they were “part of the process of the building of this island.” Incidentally, the hint in a release from the Chief Minister’s Office, on Friday 7th October, that they were preying on the people’s innocence and thriving on “the politics of fear,” was unfortunate.

The past weeks have not been very good for Government but it is in no danger of being removed from office. At least, not now. It continues to get a severe mauling not only over the Physical Planning Bill but also over the Junks Hole project which Chief Minister Fleming said would not be pursued, in the immediate future, because he was warned by the developers of Flag Luxury Properties that if the Junks Hole project went ahead Flag Luxuries would cease its development project forthwith. And with that the Junks Hole project was put on hold for some three years. According to Kennedy Hodge, Government stands to lose some US$270,000,000 in negotiated taxes and fees for the first 15 year of the life of the project and thereafter US$36,000,000 per annum.

The fact that Government has called off the project, because of Flag Luxury’s warning, has not gone down well with the Anguillian people in general. But the Chief Minister did say that he had to safeguard the jobs of “approximately 500 construction workers.” When the protesters marched on his office on 4th October one of them carried a placard which read: Mr Sillerman Prime Minister of Anguilla.

While there is considerable dissatisfaction over Government’s reason for holding back the Junks Hole project, there are mixed views on whether it should go ahead at this time. These views are split mainly along geographical lines. People in the western part of the island feel that a major project in the eastern part would lead to the mass importation of labour with accompanying social problems. On the other hand, people in the eastern part are claiming that their area is desert – is virtually undeveloped – and is in dire need of a good project. They are complaining that they have to travel too far in the west to find employment. Many were anxiously looking forward to the opportunity of working nearer home and are now unhappy that Government has reneged on its campaign promise to ensure that the Junks Hole project got started in 2005.

I think I should mention here that there is considerable sympathy in East End and Island Harbour for the Hodges family from whom most of the land for the project was to be bought. They were diehard supporters of the ANA (now the AUF) from its inception and therefore people readily empathise with Kennedy Hodge’s frustration and disappointment over Government’s handling of the project.

Kennedy was on the ANA’s platform from the early 1980s. He parted ways with Ronald Webster’s (his uncle’s) PPP against which he campaigned vigorously. To quote him (1984): “In two and a half years, Mr Webster’s Government have accomplished a wonderful amount of nothing: a whole island full of nothing.” He said that things were so bad in Island Harbour that, “If it wasn’t for the fishermen to fish they would starve to death. They have no employment and the boys are living wasted lives.” To silence his critics he asked: “How Christian would I be if I stand idly by and watch all the young boys in Island Harbour, who I grow up with, become drunkards and wasters because they don’t have no jobs and no future ahead of them?”

It was a bitter Kennedy who told a political meeting (1984) that: “Mr Webster put my father out of a job while every single one of my father’s children was going to school and my mother was a housewife at home.”
During the 1989 elections, Kennedy was on the ANA’s platform giving Victor Banks’ ADP hell. Hear him: “I have never heard a party tell so many lies from a platform like the Anguilla Democratic Party.” In the 1994 elections he came out in defence of Kenneth Harrigan whose qualifications for political leadership were the subject of much criticism. Kennedy told his listeners that Kenneth had “learnt management from the University of Life.” Today, Kennedy feels badly let down by his party. To quote him at the town hall meeting at Road School: “I do not think that the Government of Anguilla is governing Anguilla for Anguillians.”

The above issues continue to attract much public debate. The debate and all efforts and considerations towards the resolution of the issues are the essence of politics which is not an exact science. They have all the ingredients. Politics is the management of economics. Politics is a balancing act. Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich by promising to protect each from the other. Politics is war without bloodshed.