Referendum edges ever closer

| 20/08/2019 | 50 Comments
Cayman News Service
Cruise port facility, artist’s rendition

(CNS): By Monday evening the Elections Office had confirmed 4,772 of the signatures on the petition calling for a people’s referendum on the question of government’s proposed cruise berthing project in George Town, which is more than 90% of the number required. Just 520 more are needed to reach the target of 25% of registered voters to trigger the national poll, and there are still 969 signatures that have not yet been verified, leaving a comfortable cushion of around 450 names.

The Elections Office appears to be on track to complete the verification of the 5,292 names needed within the next few weeks.

Cruise Port Referendum Signature Verification Countdown

* 5,438 submitted June 12th + 199 submitted July 11th + 26 submitted August 5th + 78 Submitted Aug 15th
** Constitutionally required 25% of the 21,116 registered electors = 5,292
# of Elector Signatures submitted for Verification*# of verification forms received# of signatures remaining to be verified # of verification forms remaining to reach 5,292** % of the required 5,292** signatures received Date & Time of Last Update
5,741 4,772 969 520 90.2% Aug 19, 7PM

Johann Moxam, one of the activists spearheading the campaign for the vote, told CNS that the Cruise Port Referendum campaigners remained very confident that the referendum is inevitable.

“The only people who seemed to think we would not get the numbers are those in government, who have erected endless obstacles using the people’s money to try to stop it, and the handful of pro-port lobbyists set to benefit from this government-sponsored corporate welfare if this project were to go ahead,” Moxam said.

“It is unfortunate that the government failed to appreciate the widespread public concerns from the very beginning about this proposal and failed to make any real effort to address those concerns. This vote will happen because government didn’t listen to the public.

“But what we need now is the same commitment on voting day that we have had from everybody that has been involved in this campaign and that signed the petition to really show government the real power of the people,” he added.

Depending on the wording of the question, stopping the cruise port will require 50% plus one of the entire electoral roll to vote against the government’s proposed project; a simple majority of the turnout will not be enough unless it is also equal to more than half of registered voters.

Based on the current list of voters, that figure is 10,585. However, there will be a new electoral roll before the referendum which could be considerably longer than the current list because many people have registered to vote over the last few months in anticipation of the referendum succeeding.

While not everyone who signed the petition or registered to vote is against the project, these numbers give an indication of how important this issue is to the wider community.

The anonymity of the ballot box also means that civil servants, public sector workers and people who do business with government who may have been unable or uncomfortable putting their name to the petition will be able to vote.

For more information about verification or registering to vote, visit the Elections Office website.


CNS news is free to read but not free to produce. Please consider supporting independent journalism in the Cayman Islands.


Tags: , , , ,

Category: Local News

Comments (50)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. SSM345 says:

    This referendum is going to showcase the plutocracy we all live in.

    11
    3
  2. Anonymous says:

    Congrats to the CPR on many fronts, as mentioned before this is historic. The people of the Cayman Islands should recognise what the CPR has achieved in that a ‘fat cat govt’ isn’t simply going to bowl over the electorate for a likely agenda beyond that of the best interests of the Country. I really hope they succeed on two fronts, first probably humiliating those elected officials who have already likely promised to the cruise lines and other entities that they’ll get this pushed through foregoing transparency to the Cayman people and secondly but more importantly, a demonstration by the electorate/Caymanians that they do have a say of what they believe themselves is right for the Country and the environment in which they live.

    22
    22
  3. Anonymous says:

    Simple – build the dock and you destroy our island. We do not need the dock

    33
    29
  4. Anonymous says:

    Pure obstructionism on parade. The dock has been on the manifesto for the last 3 elections and each time it has been an on the adgenda of the winning party.

    Referendums are for items that are NOT on the agenda or the winning party is taking a direction they did NOT campaign on. Otherwise this is what opposing obstructionists do.

    Please get on this BS referendum so it can be handily defeated and we can build the dock already.

    39
    51
    • Anonymous says:

      Which winning party is that this time around?

      19
      4
    • Anonymous says:

      The outgoing PPM did not win a controlling mandate from the people at the last election.

      26
      15
    • anonymous says:

      the ppm did not win the majority. they needed Big Mac and his udp to form the coalition government.
      maybe you should read section 70 of the constitution before typing nonsense.

      23
      16
    • Anonymous says:

      Absolutely correct, but we need CHEC here on it so it will cost less money.

      18
    • Caymanians don't let the PPM rewrite history... they have no mandate says:

      Except The PPM didn’t win a majority in 2013 neither did they win a majority in 2017
      The PPM have only ever had one elected majority in their 20 year history

      You people keep clinging to the idea that the people have been secretly wanting this project for decades yet there is no evidence whatsoever otherwise they would have elected the PPM years ago
      Also you seem to forget the years the PPM spent in opposition to this project when Mckeeva was Premier
      Did the mandate evaporate when he was leading only to return now that they are at the helm?

      The liars who seek to rewrite history love hiding behind the fact that few people in Cayman actually remember back to the 2013 elections

      Let me refresh your memory the PPM convinced Julianna O’Connor Connolly and C4C candidates to join their ranks in 2013 AFTER the election to form their majority
      They had no majority given to them by the people
      The people only elected 9 PPM candidates in 2013 but they needed 10 to have a majority

      The PPM convinced Mckeeva his cronies and 2 independents that they should join forces in 2017 AFTER the election, as we all remember 2017
      In total the people only elected 7 PPM members, a net loss of 2 seats from 2013 which displays in fact that not only do they not have a mandate but during their years in power they have lost favour with the areas they claim they have been representing

      Just to summarize

      The PPM didn’t win a majority in 2013
      The PPM didn’t win a majority in 2017

      Any claims of a mandate from the people is farcical considering they were against the project when Mckeeva was in charge

      24
      8
  5. Anonymous says:

    It’s hard to understand why more people haven’t signed up for another public holiday.

    9
    15
  6. Anonymous says:

    Just Build the port

    51
    70
  7. Anonymous says:

    Were voters on Cayman Brac and Little Cayman excluded from the Port Referendum?

    6
    9
  8. Anonymous says:

    The people said no and then there was no dock built. The end.

    35
    29
    • Anonymous says:

      But is your short story a tragedy, comedy or heroic tale?

      9
      2
      • V for Victory says:

        It is already a historic event.
        The people are using their power to get answers from a government that ignores the masses. This is a historic victory for democracy and people power.

        20
        3
      • David Yochim says:

        Is it true that if you are registered to vote on this and you don’t vote, your absence vote will be counted as a No?

        4
        2
        • Anon says:

          We don’t know what the question is yet, but if you don’t show up your none vote counts towards government #s therefore if you don’t want the port built, then you should show up, read and understand the question and vote accordingly.

          If you are a registered voter and don’t show up to vote then you can’t complain if the vote doesn’t go the way you hoped it would – look at the UK & Brexit, a lot of people didn’t vote because they thought it was a done deal it would never happen, but then wished after the fact that they had voted no, but to was too late by then

        • Anonymous says:

          yes

          1
          1
        • Anonymous says:

          The Question will almost certainly be phrased as a negative attendance affirmation for the Port. That’s how these slippery eels work. Expect the ad-campaigns (already underway) and wording of question, to be twisted to conflate uncorrelated outcomes with a “No” vote. Disregarding the assurances from the liners themselves, that they have no intention of leaving the Cayman Islands off Western Caribbean itineraries, where we continue to be geographically best positioned for a safe, risk-controlled mid-voyage stop. Especially for current and future fleets of equivalent or smaller gross tonnage and passenger count. All of the baseline Unity assumptions are wrong.

  9. Anonymous says:

    PLEEEASE

    No more verification process after this.
    Should we have another petition for a referendum, “conjoin” signing it with verifying the person.

    21
    2
  10. I ❤️ Kirkbots says:

    Kirkbots and professional bloggers on contract with the Tourism ministry and pro-port special interests are officially in DEFCON 5 mode are trying again to win the 👍👎 battle on the unscientific cns comment polls.

    Do they get paid per post or senseless comment?

    33
    8
    • Anonymous says:

      A comment below currently has 10 in favor and 40 against the port

      Do you get paid to repost this on every page?

      6
      7
      • Anonymous says:

        No our government have given that contract to Fountainhead to manage social media and pr campaign. That is in the public domain the rest of us just cannot support the greed and special interests desperate for the project to go ahead no matter the costs.

        4
        3
      • Anonymous says:

        I ❤️ “I ❤️ Kirkbots”!!!

        3
        2
    • Anonymous says:

      Think you mean DEFCON 1. DEFCON 5 is everyday readiness.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Cabinet will make it some totally leading question like “should the Cayman Islands have enhanced cruise and cargo ship berthing facilities?”

    Everyone would like to be able to say “yes” to that. The devil is in all the many details. When you get into those, you get a question more like “should the natural harbour in Grand Cayman be destroyed to bring more cruise ship tourists?”

    What the question should be, after full disclosure of everything – everything – to do with the project, is something neutral and specific like: “do you support the Government proceeding with the proposed [insert port project name here]?”

    Then those in favour can cry “YES!” and those against can cry “NO!”

    19
    15
    • Anonymous says:

      If this was earlier in the term i’d agree with you, but we are less than 2 years out from the next election

      The PPM is going to be cognizant of that, people’s memory in Cayman are extremely short
      But they aren’t that short

      The PPM would be opening themselves up to electoral wipeout if they pulled shenanigans like that when this petition has such widespread public support

      They would be pissing off the majority of the country at a time when they can barely hold on to their seats
      Wouldn’t be smart politics

      4
      2
  12. Anonymous says:

    So is the construction of the port!

    4
    19
    • Anonymous says:

      1) We will still have cruise ship tourism, we just won’t be called on by the almost-zero cruise ships operating in this region or that will operate in this region in the future that ‘need’ piers. Cruise lines have told us this, in contradiction to what the government said over the years (that we will lose the industry altogether without piers).

      2) The impact on employment of the project going ahead or not going ahead is one of the murkiest aspects of this debate. The best Moses can come up with is if we do the project, we will have ‘more jobs of the same type’ as we already do, and if not, we will have fewer such jobs. There can’t be many people wholly dependent on cruise tourism for their living (e.g. taxi drivers – they carry everybody everywhere, the port is just one source of income; tour operators – they serve stay-overs too; restaurants – they serve everybody, etc.). For the small group who are wholly dependent, we are not going to lose cruise tourism, so most of them will keep their jobs and businesses too. So you end up with an unlucky few, maybe a few dozen who land on hard times, who probably aren’t doing the best jobs currently or whose businesses already have problems. Well, that’s life.

      3) Income tax for Caymanians – you must be joking. Caymanians wouldn’t even stand for the government taxing expats. Our economy is not based on cruise tourism so a drop in it would not have such an effect. Our economy is based on financial services, other services, and stay-over tourism – all of which suffer from an increase in cruise tourism, and benefit from a drop in it.

      26
      20
  13. Anonymous says:

    Takes CNS for that stunning Picture. Lets build now.

    41
    45
  14. Anonymous says:

    Tell us when so we can book our flights! Remember, not voting is a vote in favour. Vacation time!

    12
    36
  15. Anonymous says:

    After the dock is built, those people that are against it now will be bragging g about the good dock we have

    61
    69

You can comment anonymously. See CNS Comment Policy at the top of this page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

For a couple of hours on Wednesday afternoon this site reverted to a day in March. We believe that this issue has now been permanently fixed. To all our readers who landed on our site during that time, we apologise for the confusion.