Democracy is alive and well in St. Kitts and Nevis
By Thinking Citizen (A Labour Spokesman Columnist)
The night of Tuesday October 23, 2007, was another occasion on which Democracy triumphed over Massa Day. On that night we of this nation of St.Kitts and Nevis experienced Democracy fully in action before our very own eyes. This was Democracy in action devoid of the Government propaganda, rhetoric, character assassination or innuendoes.
On the night of Tuesday 23, 2007, the full Cabinet of Labour Government Ministers went before the nation face to face a full account of Government’s stewardship and to give members of the public the opportunity to ask questions and receive full proper and relevant answers from the Prime Minister.
The Labour Government calls its exercise in direct Democracy “Face- To- face”. It is an innovation never seen before not even during the PAM’s 15 years in office. The cabinet of Labour Government Ministers has demonstrated over and over again, that they have nothing in office. The Cabinet of the Labour Government Ministers have demonstrated over and over again that they have nothing to hide and therefore they are not afraid to subject themselves to public questioning at any time.
PAM does not really know how to deal with Labour’s exercise in direct Democracy. So PAM “rents” a fool, for the night, on every occasion that the Labour Government is hosting a “face the people” meeting called “Face- To- Face”. The function of the fool on the occasion is to ask silly, childish and irrelevant questions in a loud and boorish manner and then run away.
On every occasion of a “Face- To- Face” meeting, PAM “rents” a fool. The function of these fools is to disturb the meeting with the foolishness, create confusion and try to get the government Ministers side-tracked into all sorts of irrelevant, imaginary and immaterial issues in order to prevent the meetings from being successful, really informative and really edifying.
The political fortunes as well as the credibility of the Labour Party Government grows bigger and bigger and gets better and better after each “Face-To-Face” meeting. The reason for this is quite simple. The PAM hierarchy is provided with a glorious opportunity to ask the Prime Minister or any of his Ministers all the questions that are being asked in the Democrat weekly in the “Man Over The Wall” (Is It True?) column. Strangely enough no one from PAM hierarchy or from the Democrat newspaper ever attends to ask any questions.
St. John’s Gospel, chapter 8 and verse 32, says “And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” The PAM ites however are not, and have never been concerned about the truth. They do not want to be free of ignorance, bias prejudice, malice and political tribalism. It suits them to remain as ignorant and as uninformed as they are. St. John’s Gospel speaks of such people when it says at Chapter 8 and verse 44 “There is no truth in him.”
No political party, no matter how often and for how long it marches, can really claim to be espousing the true ideals of Democracy when its chief stock-in-trade consists of lies and deception.
The PAM party lied to and deceived the people when the party announced that it had not re-structured the entire Electoral System in 1983. The PAMites argue that they made “only slight amendments to the Electoral Law.” On the contrary PAM amended the Law to dispense with the Residence requirement and in addition the party made it possible for nationals born in St.Kitts or Nevis before to vote in our General Elections on Polling Day.
Two high-ranking PAMites went before the Sir Louis Blom-Cooper Commission of Inquiry and in full sight of the public told some whopping big lies. Commissioner Blom- Cooper asked one of the two PAM ites to withdraw the document containing the lies and told the other PAM ites that his lies had been discovered and that no weight would be attached to his lying and deceptive testimony.
The PAM party contested in the High Court the 2004 General Elections results of three (3) constituencies, namely Constituency No.1, No.4 and NO.8. The High Court judge ruled in favour of the Labour Party in all three cases. However, true to the form, the PAM party submitted as part of its petition in respect of Constituency N0. 1, a false and deceptive document which was later withdrawn.
When the issue of Constitutional Reform was first placed on the table the PAM party announced that it would not participate in any process of Constitutional Reform unless Electoral Reform is part of the process of Constitutional Reform. The PAM slogan was “Constitutional Reform NO, Electoral Reform YES.”
After issuing such public statement PAM has seen it fit not to participate in the recently concluded Electoral Reform process. Does that mean then that PAM will never participate in the process of Constitutional Reform? Only time can tell.
The present Labour Government can be characterized as being open, transparent, accountable, honest, decent and upright. But the same thing can never be said about the PAM party which it governed the country for 15 years from 1980 to 1995. One only has to study the Reports of the Prof. Randolph Williams and the Sir Louis Blom-Cooper Inquiries to discover how unethical and corrupt the PAM Government was.
In 1983 PAM passed the iniquitous “House of Assembly Elections Ordinance (Amendment) Act. The loop-holes that PAM put into the Act were big enough for a Mack truck to pass through. But PAM put the loop-holes selfishly and deliberately into the Act in order to confer upon the PAM Government a selfish, unfair and unjust advantage over the Labour Party. Neither the Chamber of Industry and Commerce nor the Bar Association raised a voice in protest.
The chamber of Industry and Commerce has long since become the foolish echo of the PAM party. If PAM does not want Price Control the Chamber of Industry and Commerce does not want Price Control either. If PAM wants “finger-prints” the Chamber of Industry and Commerce wants “finger-prints” too. When PAM is silent the Chamber is silent too. When PAM speaks the Chamber echoes what PAM say.
Pam has always wrongly accused of the Labour Party of not sticking to the high principles of Democracy. PAM However is never prepared to act in a democratic fashion whether the party is in office or not.
The PAM Party Government, voted to give its Ministers hefty Pensions and later on huge increases in Salaries and Advances. The increases were worked out in Cabinet without the involvement of any outside, independent, impartial, non-partisan Committee or Commission.
Unlike the PAM Party Government, the Labour Government established an independent, outside, non-partisan Committee to look into existing structure of Salaries and Allowances for Parliamentarians and to make recommendations.
PAM’s reaction was incredible. PAM accused the Labour Government of all sorts of things and then initiated a campaign of vilification and abuse against the members of the 3-man Committee appointed by the Labour Government. What was the Chamber’s response in all this? The Chamber kept a deadly silence.
The PAM Government displayed no transparency during its entire period in office and felt that the Government was accountable only to PAM Executive “Up De Hill” and not to the people as a whole (the electorate). The PAM Government operated under the principal of “the Paramountcy party.”
Without discussing anything with the Techinical Experts in the Civil Service or with Senior Civil Servants or with the Labour members in the National Assembly or with the population in general , Dr. Simmonds, as Minister of Finance signed a Loan Guarantee in the sum of U.S $ 25,330,000 on behalf of Nautical Trading (St.Kitts) Ltd.
The meeting at the Basseterre High School Auditorium on the 23rd of October was a far cry from the meeting held at the New Town Primary School (Pasture School) in 1982 to discuss the Independence Constitution.
At that meeting Labour supporters were put under “heavy manners”. They could speak only when the PAMites wished them to speak and if the Labour supporters asked inconvenient questions they were told to shut up and sit down. Many Labour supporters were beaten up. Some were arrested. A few were charged and even served jail time. That was Democracy, PAM style.
Sir Lee L. Moore Q.C was arrested by the police, under instructions from the PAM Government, and charged with Sedition, Sir Lee was arrested because he said, truthfully, that quantities of illicit drugs were passing feely in and out of the country through our major Airport. Rather than arresting the drug traffickers, the PAM Government arrested Lee Moore.
All that has changed under the Labour Government. All sorts of people, the Big Ones, the Small Ones and the Ones in between can say whatever they like, publicly, without fear of political persecution. Civil Servants, whether their surnames are White, Greene, Black, Browne or Grey can say exactly what they wish on VON, WINNN FM, CHOICE FM, ZIZ or KYSS FM about our Prime Minister or the Labour Government without the fear of losing their jobs. That is Democracy Labour style.
It has been said that at a certain time in the world’s history’ a group of men set on a journey to find the Kingdom of heaven. After a long search and finding nothing the men were told that “the kingdom of Heaven is within you”.
PAM marched around Basseterre a couple of Thursdays ago looking for Democracy. At the end of the march the PAMites realized that Democracy is alive and well in St.Kitts and Nevis.
Now the story of PAM Danville Walker and “finger-prints” is quite interesting. Mr. Danville Walker is Director of Elections in Jamaica. He is put forward by PAM as an expert on Elections. However, two (2) un-opened boxes of uncounted ballots were found in the electoral Office in Jamaica after votes had been counted in the last General Elections in that island. Even now one political candidate who ran in the last General elections is challenging the number of votes of his opponent in the High Court in Jamaica.
The people of St.Kitts and Nevis know that “finger-prints” were not used in Antigua during that island’s last general Elections. How is it that PAM brought in Mr. Danville Walker from Jamaica to brain-wash PAM people? Why didn’t PAM bring in an official from the Electoral Office in Antigua to do the job?
In his address on Wednesday, 24th October, 2007, Mr. Walker delivered a stunning rebuke to the People’s Action Movement. He told the party, that no Government should be in charge of Electoral Reform and that an independent body should do so instead.”
Mr. Walker rebuked PAM on account of the fact that in 1983 the PAM Government carried out Electoral reform, all by itself in one day, without consultation with or without the involvement of the general public.
Somebody in PAM should have taken Mr. Walker aside and briefed him properly before he began his address. Someone should have told him that the people of St.Kitts and Nevis have Cable T.V and watch regularly the CMC channel CARIB VISION.
Hundreds of viewers throughout the Caribbean saw and heard Mr. Danville Walker on television on Elections day in Jamaica. The T.V show was anchored by Julius Gittens and Kaymar Jordon. And lots of what Mr. Walker said on television in Jamaica was contradicted by what he said publicly in Jamaica and a different thing here in St.Kitts. Is he a mercenary working hard for his money?
My understanding is that there are 60 constituencies in Jamaica. However “finger-prints” were used in only 13 of those 60 constituencies in Jamaica. Hundreds of people in the Caribbean watched their television sets and saw the multitudes of people in long lines just waiting to get a chance to vote. We also heard their moaningS and their groanings and complaints.
Why would PAM want to fool off its own people by bringing Mr. Walker to St.Kitts to tell them stupidness? If the “finger-print” system is so superior why wasn’t that system used in all of the 60 constituencies in Jamaica? If the “finger-print” system is faster that the regular system why did we see on television such long lines of hungry, fed-up and frustrated people just waiting to get a chance to vote?
It is a great pity that PAM is so crazy and did not publish in the Democrat what exactly Mr. Walker said to refute what Ministers Dwyer Astaphan and Nigel Carty said about Mr. Walker’s business interests and the conduct of the Jamaica Elections. As a result the general public is none the wiser. However, anyone who watched Mr. Walker on television as he spoke in Jamaica on Elections Day and the days after would know that he contradicted himself many times during his address in St.Kitts.
If the use of “finger-prints” is the best way of ensuring a corrupt-free voters’ list and eliminating fraud on Elections Day how come the “finger-prints” system was not used in all the 60 constituencies in Jamaica at the last General elections? How come the “finger-print” system is not in use in the majority CARICOM countries?
How can Mr. Danville Walker recommend to PAM a system that proved to be unreliable, unsatisfactory and of dubious value as the Jamaica experience demonstrated. PAM and Mr. Walker cannot fool intelligent and well-informed people. We saw it all after watching several days of T.V.
It is quite clear to a number of persons that Mr. Walker must have some sort of interest-financial, business, political or otherwise-in the “finger-print” system that proved to be less than successful in his own country of Jamaica?
How come the majority of CARICOM countries do not use the “finger-print” system? How come the people in Great Britain, America, Canada and Australia do not use the “finger-print” system?
Why was there so much confusion and frustration and dissatisfaction in Jamaica where the “finger-print” system was tried out? How come serious-minded political analysts like Dr. Peter Wickham do not recommend the “finger-print” system?
The Democrat reported Mr. Danville walker as saying that “an independent body should be in charge of Electoral Reform”. That sounds good on the face of it. But Mr. Walker does not know PAM. Unless PAM is given the power to appoint the independent body PAM will always find a hundred and one reasons to complain and criticize.
The present Government appointed an expert and independent 3-man Committee to look into the structure of salaries and allowances for Parliamentarians and advise. Every week each member of the 3-man Committee, Messrs Charles Brisbane, Emile Ferdinand and Omax Gardener was soundly abused by PAM and the Democrat newspaper simply because the Government did not ask PAM to choose the members and establish the Committee.
It is PAM and not Labour who made it possible in 1983 for nationals who never lived in St.Kitts and whose parents have never lived in St.Kitts to vote in our General Elections in a constituency of their own choosing. The visiting overseas voters were directed by PAM to cast their ballots in Constituencies 1, 2, 5 and 8.
My final observation is this: Charity begins at home. It is a great pity that Mr. Walker did not put all his progressive ideas to the test in all of Jamaica during the last General Elections in that country.
*The above is not necessarily the view and opinion of the Federal Government of St. Kitts and Nevis and is merely being circulated to interested parties.
