Boundary meetings face low turnout
(CNS): There were less than 40 people at the Electoral Boundary Commission’s public meeting in George Town Monday night, when the panel tasked with drawing up the recommended boundary lines for the country’s new political landscape arrived in the capital. With just a handful of voters turning up to the Sister Islands meetings and just two dozen in East End, public participation remained disappointing in the capital as well.
Electoral Boundary Commission (L-R) Steve McField, Chairman Lisa R. Handley and Adriannie Webb
As Kenny Bryan reports for CNS, there are well over 7,000 voters in George Town, where the commission may be required to make the most changes to boundary lines for the introduction of one man one vote.
But while voters may not be attracted to the meetings, those who will be directly impacted by the creation of the single member constituencies in George Town — the capital’s MLAs — were out in force. Planning Minister Kurt Tibbetts, who is unlikely to run in 2017, was the only elected member from the capital who did not attend the meeting.
Despite the importance of shaping the new constituencies, the issues of ‘one man, one vote’9 and single member constituencies still occupied voters’ minds and only a few people asked questions relating to the boundaries of the new voting districts.
In 2010 the previous boundary commission recommended the borders for single member constituencies based on current polling station districts, which had given a fairly even number of voters in each constituency in Grand Cayman, and the current commission will likely be guided by that previous research.
Since then, however, voter numbers have increased and boundaries may need to be redrawn to take into account not only newly registered voters but the potential for growth in certain districts. The commissioners are also remitted to take geographical and historical boundaries into consideration and not just headcount.
The Sister Islands have a constitutional mandate for a minimum of two representatives regardless of their low voter numbers. Although neither East End nor North Side, Grand Cayman’s smallest constituencies, have any constitutional protection, the historical boundaries of those districts, their geographical size and potential for future growth are almost certain to ensure that they will not be merged.
The district meetings continue this evening when the EBC moves to West Bay, where the meeting begins at 8pm at the John Cumber Primary School. Then on Wednesday, the commissioners move to Bodden Town, before wrapping up the open public meetings in North Side on Thursday.
Were there sandwiches?
Who cares – same old bunch of clowns will be there still
I completely disagree with the written article on this issue.
“Although neither East End nor North Side, Grand Cayman’s smallest constituencies, have any constitutional protection, the historical boundaries of those districts, their geographical size and potential for future growth are almost certain to ensure that they will not be merged.”
The potential for future growth is a poor argument for the exceedingly small districts contained in East End and North Side. It is ridiculous to have seated MLAs who are elected by 350 votes. Those districts are less than 50% the size of other districts and given the regular cry of “fairness” by both East End and North Side MLA representatives I would think that fairness plays a part in this determination as well.
Maybe the reason for the low turn out is that this will go the way of many other reports, feedbacks, forums and precisely nothing will be done. I am tired of giving feedback when I know the politicians will do exactly as they intended in the first place.
No, bobo, low turnout is the Cayman way and has been for the 30+ years I have been involved with public presentations. Caymanians don’t show up then like to bitch when things are put in place they don’t like and then they claim they were not consulted. Ah so it go.
I voted for OMOV, but I see no need to go and give input to the Boundary Commission. They have been given a mandate, now they just need to get on with drawing the boundaries. That is all that really has to be done. After we have had a few elections under OMOV and gerrymandering starts then we can go and give opinions to a Boundary Commission.
The debate over whether OMOV is the best system is over. It has been passed into law and the only thing left to do is to draw up the boundaries, and they have the work of a previous Boundary Commission to use as a guide. Most people only go to these meetings to hear themselves speak and talk about things unrelated to the subject at hand.
I really don’t understand why someone would go and give input to Steve McField who has been appointed by someone vehemently opposed to exactly what the Boundary Commission is supposed to be doing.
Anonymous driftwood
At the risk of not following one of my survival principles which is to leave politics and constitutional issues to those who are privileged Caymanians (no pun intended) permit me to say that creating small constituencies with single representation is fraught with dangers and will serve only to divide, alienate and disenfranchised communities that were built on shared cultural and idiosyncratic norms and customs. Take for example BT, where I have lived all of my life since moving to Cayman and have moved about within the district but no matter where I live in the district I feel a special affinity to BT and it’s people and I consider all the representatives my representatives and in fact I know that I can call on any of them. Now look to the future if what is proposed materialized. I will have one representative who could careless about another voting constituency and why would I want another part of my district to fail so that my little village can succeed?
Simply put, these are some of the things that make Cayman unique. The fact that there is low turnout might be an indication that people don’t care for the proposed changes.
I support in principle OMOV but if this is the only way that it can be achieved then forget about it and we can’t afford to add more time-wasting full-time paid MLAs or MPs to our strained budget.
In passing, you revealed a surprise in your article that Mr. Tibetts won’t be contesting the next election. He’s someone I admire, but if true, it says something about his character. Now, if only McKeeva et al would do the same.
You seriously expect us to believe that you are welcome to call on any on of the BT representatives and expect them to properly represent you? And you use the handle “anonymous driftwood”? I would love to see the reception you get from Ozzie!
Keep the numbers of the districts close to the same. Merge East End & North Side into 1 district.
In reference to the HEAD LINE, “low attendance”, can this paper say where and when the meetings were publicized? ( I was only aware of the GT meeting when watching the Monday evening TV news, and realized that it was half way over.)
CNS: We published an article “Boundary commission goes on the road” on 13 April and also put it on our Notice Board (link in the menu bar) on the same day. I think if you look you’ll probably find that all media houses promoted the meetings. We can only do so much.
We all know that the PPM is only paying lip service to OMOV and would love to find a way to not put it in. UDP is against it. The people want it. We need to get it in as promised by the PPM in its manifesto. If not PPM is history as is Cayman.
The people do not want it. If we did, the referendum would have passed.
The real referendum on OMOV was the general elections that followed, and there it passed. I could not with a good conscience place an “X” by the name of any politician who was/is opposed OMOV, and I dare say that many people not particularly aligned with either party voted the same way. That was the undoing of the UDP everywhere except their stronghold in West Bay.
Is it really any wonder? People have lost faith in government. Seems to me all the politicians are self serving and have little interest in what’s best for the country and all thats best for themselves and their business interests.
Forget about the district system.
It dates back to the time you were born, raised and died in the same house.
National elections, island wide representatives. This way an eastender can vote for bush and a westbayer can vote for Miller.
In that way we get the least useless politicians in the house.
Cutting up a tiny small village of 1000 adults into several districts is stupid.
One country, one election, nation wide.
I agree with poster 7:41. To me this is the only sensible approach. The way that is being proposed, as I understand it, is seriously flawed.
Exactly. We shouldn’t need 19 double-dipping career louts in the LA when 5 or 6 would do. The MLAs rarely show up having done any homework on the interests of this nation. Further, the public and press should be allowed to sit in on these sessions and the transcripts should be public record.
I was there and only afterwards did I realize the Commission never asked ‘what do you think of the boundaries as drawn.’ It was always ‘do you have any questions about anything’, so people asked them questions.
Did you or any one else ask to see the way the boundaries were drawn?