Opposition Member in the House of Assembly, Hubert Hughes, says it is time to have far-reaching amendments to the Anguilla Belonger Commission Act to provide more rights for the people of the island.

Mr. Hubert Hughes

“A lot has changed in Anguilla in the last 15-20 years and we need now to take note of those colossal changes, Mr. Speaker, and address the question of belongership as it affects the indigenous rights and privileges of the people of Anguilla,” Mr. Hughes said.

He was at the time speaking on an amendment to the Act introduced by Attorney General, Ronald Scipio, on May 8. According to Mr. Scipio, the measure “is to reduce the burden on the Attorney General in attending Belonger Commission meetings and to facilitate him in delegating a law officer from his Chambers to attend the meetings in his stead.”

Belongership is a touchy issue in Anguilla and a major matter in the constitutional reform process now taking place on the island. Mr. Hughes therefore took the opportunity to share his thoughts on the subject although the amending Bill did not provide for that.

“The question of belongership is fundamental to the economic and social development of a people,” the Opposition Member continued. “A small island people become very vulnerable when its immigration system is opened up to the extent of belongership, and we need to take serious note and ask ourselves a question – ‘why has the issue of positive discrimination been introduced in other small island states around the world [like Jersey and Guernsey]. They have positive discrimination as far as immigration and belongership is concerned. It is all about your social wellbeing as a people or your economic status as a people within your own geographical domain...It’s not just a simple scenario of only a belongership situation. It is much more than that…

AG Ronld Scipio

“The belongership situation is worrying because the people who strived to attain belongership in Anguilla do not need it for any other reason but to rape our lands and to dominate the economic, social and financial systems in Anguilla. I think we should have a hard, hard look at what is happening in Jersey, in Guernsey, in Monaco, in Liechstenstein, and all the other places where the indigenous people have the highest standard of living because they have positive discrimination … in favour of the indigenous population.”

Mr. Hughes drew several examples of how he thought Anguilla was suffering from extending belongership to certain persons who were profiting from the status to the disadvantage of the people of the island. He went on:

“What I want to bring to the attention of this House of Assembly is that belongership has a greater significance today than it had 25 years ago. Anguilla today is the most attractive centre in the Caribbean. We attract more billionaires than anywhere else in the Caribbean. We are the hottest spot and newest piece of cake on the block and, Mr. Speaker, the time has come for us to address in this new constitutional review the question of belonger status or else, in a sort space of time, Anguillians will be a sad people.

“I say that because I want everybody involved in this constitutional exercise review to remember one of the most important aspects of that review is to address the situation of ‘where do we as Anguillians stand in the future development of Anguilla?’ [That is because] real estate has become such an issue in Anguilla that it is going to create great instability as our young people will not be able to buy a house lot of land because everybody who thinks about selling piece of land today thinks only one way [to sell] to some ‘expat’ with a lot of money.

“Albert Lake tried his best to help the young people of Anguilla by giving them an affordable piece of land, but his land for that purpose is running out. Mr. Speaker, we need to get serious about this. It is not a frivolous suggestion. Belongership must have the issue of positive discrimination and we must not treat it lightly. It is explosive and something must be done now in this constitutional review to copy Liechstenstein, Monaco, Jersey and Guersey.”
Invited by the Speaker to respond, Mr. Scipio commented: “Mr. Speaker, there is really nothing for me to respond to because the Bill is dealing with the composition of the Belonger Commission and not issues relating to belongership.”

| Printer-friendly page | Send this article to a friend |

World News