CPR queries need for vote in absence of cruise project
(CNS): Members of the Cruise Port Referendum movement are questioning the need for a national poll on a cruise dock facility if there is no actual project for people to consider. The CPR campaign, which successfully secured support from 25% of the electorate for a vote on the PPM administration’s cruise project, noted the limited time for a campaign, a lack of appropriate legislation for it as well as the costs as reasons for government not to rush into a vote.
In a press release issued Tuesday, the group’s media contact, Michelle Lockwood, said the CPR members have asked to meet with Tourism Minister Kenneth Bryan and are waiting for a date to be set. When it is, they hope to discuss their concerns with Bryan about the plans for a poll on the broad question of whether to have a pier or not, which, if it goes ahead, is likely to happen within the next ten to twelve weeks.
Bryan has implied the question is about whether or not this country continues to cater to cruise tourism, so it needs to be a simple question (Do you want a cruise pier or not?) to establish what support there is for the basic concept.
But CPR said a government-initiated referendum is not binding on current or future governments. Therefore, without a pressing need since there are “no projects or agendas on the table”, there is no justification for a referendum this year.
“The Covid-19 pandemic clearly demonstrated the inherent risks and volatility of the cruise line industry and the need for Cayman to strike a careful balance in developing a sustainable cruise tourism sector focused on quality high spending visitors, which does not compromise the environment which much of that tourism is based on,” Lockwood stated on behalf of CPR.
Cabinet has allocated CI$1.2 million for the referendum to be held just months before the next general election, even though combining the two votes would reduce the cost by as much as half, according to past comments made by officials from the Elections Office.
“At a time when so many Caymanians are struggling with the soaring cost of living, housing and traffic, the justification to spend precious government and community resources on a referendum on what is currently not a matter of national priority seems ill-timed and irresponsible use of the people’s money,” Lockwood said. “If the government determines that this referendum question should be asked, it would be a better use of the people’s resources to hold the referendum at the same time as the 2025 general elections.”
CPR believes that holding the referendum at the same time as the general election would allow greater participation; it would give more people the opportunity to have their say on the important issue and time to register to vote. Some people have not registered because they have little faith in politics and politicians but might want to register for a referendum.
Given the long timeline in the Cayman Islands between registering to vote and appearing on the electoral roll, the list that will be published on 1 October will be one in place for this referendum. That list is unlikely to be much more than the current list of 23,464 voters.
“As we quickly approach the end of August, we are concerned why there is such a rush to hold the referendum, and particularly concerned that the lack of notice will exclude all eligible voters not already registered to vote, with the cut-off for being an eligible voter in a referendum in 2024, having already passed on 30 June,” Lockwood said.
CPR also noted that this snap referendum gives the people very little time to consider the pros and cons of voting one way or another.
The government needs to adopt official legislation for referendums. But given the timeframe the UPM has adopted, CPR said the CIG will need to adopt some kind of binding regulations that will ensure a fair campaign with equal government funding given to appropriate organisations representing both sides of the issue. This will ensure equal resources and opportunities for the public to be informed on the pros and cons.
“As an NPO, we will continue to advocate and question the referendum process. It is critical that the highest standards of international best practice, fairness and equality, which are crucial in the democratic process, are upheld with any and all referendums,” Lockwood added.
After the PPM administration began barreling towards a multi-million dollar cruise port project in partnership with various cruise lines, the CPR ran a successful campaign in 2019 to collect the number of signatures necessary to trigger the constitutional right to a people’s referendum and was able to slow down that project.
While the vote never took place because of CPR’s successful legal challenges to the government’s attempted manipulation of the questions and timing, the project finally died due to COVID-19. The pandemic allowed the public to take stock and see exactly what kind of crisis this country would have faced if the PPM had got their way and started the project before the borders closed in March 2020.
With the announcement at the end of last month that the seven political members of Cabinet had opted to approve a government referendum, the CPR has sprung back into action and is now seeking volunteers to help with this new campaign.
Anyone interested in helping with the campaign can email cprcayman@gmail.com.
See more information on the website and CPR social media pages.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
RECKLESS GOVERNMENT – ALL OF THEM – WASTING ANOTHER $1.2M
A referendum 4 months before the General Election.
The Minister of Tourism and Ports, the Hon Kenneth Bryan announced that the Government will hold a government-initiated referendum on the matter of cruise berthing before the end of 2024.
If we ever needed proof that Kenneth’s priority is taking care of his donors, this is it. Worse, this is fully endorsed by Judasanna, Andre Ebanks, Kathy-Ann Wilks, Sabrinata Turner and Heather Bodden. They have all agreed to this stupidity.
First, let’s consider what a referendum is and when its used, then let’s decide what else might have been a better question for referendum and lastly, let’s decide if we needed to spend the money now.
What is a referendum?
• The process or principle of referring an important political question, e.g. proposed constitutional change, to be decided by a general vote of the electorate – Oxford English Dictionary
• A general vote by the electorate on a single political question that has been referred to them for a direct decision.
• A referendum is where voters are asked to make a “Yes” or “No” decision on a proposal, issue, or idea. – Electionbuddy.com
• The principle or practice of submitting to popular vote a measure passed on or proposed by a legislative body or by popular initiative – Merriam Webster
• A vote in which all the people in a country or an area are asked to give their opinion about or decide an important political or social question – Cambridge Dictionary
Based on these definitions, it seems that a referendum is an important tool in the democratic process and gives the electorate direct say in pivotal decisions. A referendum requires the same set up and logistics as an election, t is an expensive and complex undertaking, and one that is typically reserved for matters of national importance
However, of all the issues and opportunities facing us as a people – from housing to immigration to the CUC monopoly to restricting foreigners from buying land and property – how the hell did cruise berthing become THE topic of a referendum? What exactly are we being asked to decide? Why now?
On Thursday, August 8th the Cayman Compass reported Minister Bryan as saying “There’s no project; there’s no driving force. This is just simply, we need to know where the people stand with the cruise industry to know what direction to take,” Bryan told the Cayman Compass on Tuesday {August 6th} y as reported by the Compass on August 8th.
Using the Minister’s own words, this is clearly NOT an urgent or pressing issue that warrants spending another $1.2 Million dollars on a referendum. FFS Kennef, who are you working for? Not the Caymanian people! You are a political prostitute – doing the bidding of whoever gave you or promised you your next big ‘donation’.
It is irresponsible to spend $1.2M on a referendum some 20 weeks before the next general election.
But, if you, your Premier and the rest of your Caucus are determined to waste our money by holding a referendum, then here is the question to ask:
“Caymanian voters, do you want to reverse the system of one man one vote and replace it with a system of national elections ?”
Or
“Caymanian voters, do you support requiring full transparency of all donations to MPs for 12 months before an election and for the entire time they hold office?”
Or
“Caymanian Voter, do you believe that Government should invest in utility scale solar electricity generation and lower the cost of electricity for all?”
Or
“Caymanian voters, do you think Government should continue to pump $10Million dollars a year into the Cayman Turtle Farm, which continues to lose money and is unable to repay its debt?”
Minister Kenneth: your handlers are showing
Pemier Julianna: your greedy, power-hungry stay- in- power at all costs true colours are showing.
Caymanians use your power. Vote them out.
The Legislative Assembly, now CI Parliament, has failed to establish a general law and framework for voter-initiated referendums. The LA/Parliament has been in violation of Section 70 since the Constitution Order was passed in 2009. Nothing has improved to allow Kenny or UPM to proceed with anything until there is a framework mechanism to allow voters to exercise their rights to be heard and counted.
I agree there should be a general framework law for referendums but unfortunately the Court of Appeals disagrees.
The court stated that basically the only thing Parliament is bound by is the plain text of the constitution, any considerations for fairness and regulations are matters of policy for the government of the day. This is not the US; the courts here have limited ability to interpret the constitutionality of acts unless they are expressly written set out or detailed in the Constitution.
https://caymannewsservice.com/2020/07/appeal-court-overturns-jr-ruling-on-port-vote-2/
Much like the section of the constitution that mentions advisory district councils – there are bits of the constitution that sound good but are only mentioned in passing and not actually fully established and set out within the constitution itself and Parliament in its various forms has refused to establish them in line with the expectation that was had when the constitution was drafted. It desperately needs quite drastic amendments which will are nowhere near occurring.
How many times and how many ways does this country/the majority of the community have to say “No”?
We’ve already had a cruise port referendum…why are we having another?
We were meant to have a cruise port referendum
It never happened
Because CPR prevented it from taking place.
You keep repeating this lie
Except it was the PPM that decided to can the vote straight from the mouth of Alden Mclaughlin:
“The cruise port referendum is not something that is even on the government’s agenda for the rest of this term,” McLaughlin said. “Whatever happens with that, it will be another government that deals with it.”
https://www.caymancompass.com/2020/04/16/premier-cruise-referendum-no-longer-on-governments-agenda/
You keep repeating that, it doesn’t change the fact that CPR prevented the referendum from taking place.
You also continue to neglect to mention that CPR lost.
https://caymannewsservice.com/2021/05/privy-council-rejects-rascals-referendum-appeal/
Why not ask this question along with several others that need to be adressed at the next general election?
Common sense aint so common anymore.
If I had to guess I would assume Her Holiness and God’s Chosen representative on Earth: the Premier vetoed a vote on gambling, the Governor and the UK probably said no to a vote weed (which the Premier was all too happy to hear)
Those were the only other issues that would have likely been put forward for a vote
Nothing has even been passed in the Parliament to trigger the vote. The process takes at least 3 months I believe so how can we have a Referendum before end of 2024.
To our people,
Certainly! Here is an argument you can use in your letter to the Minister of Tourism advocating for a cruise ship dock on the island of Grand Cayman:
—
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, Zip Code]
[Email Address]
[Phone Number]
[Date]
Honorable Kenneth Bryan
Minister of Tourism
Dear Honorable Kenneth Bryan,
I am writing to express my strong support for the construction of a cruise ship dock on the beautiful island of Grand Cayman. As a loyal visitor to your stunning island, I believe that having a dedicated cruise ship facility will bring numerous benefits to both the local economy and the tourism industry as a whole.
1. Economic Growth: A cruise ship dock will attract more cruise lines to include Grand Cayman in their itineraries, leading to an increase in tourist arrivals. This, in turn, will result in higher spending on tours, excursions, dining, and shopping, benefiting local businesses and creating job opportunities for island residents.
2. Improved Infrastructure: Having a designated cruise ship dock will streamline the disembarkation and embarkation process, making it more efficient and convenient for both passengers and cruise lines. This will enhance the overall visitor experience and encourage repeat visits to Grand Cayman, contributing to the island’s positive reputation as a premier tourist destination.
3. Environmental Considerations: By developing a modern cruise ship dock with sustainable practices such as proper waste management and emissions control, Grand Cayman can minimize its environmental impact while still reaping the economic benefits of cruise tourism. It is essential to ensure that any construction plans adhere to stringent environmental regulations to protect the island’s pristine natural beauty.
4. Strategic Positioning: In a competitive global tourism market, having a cruise ship dock can set Grand Cayman apart from other destinations in the region. The convenience of a dedicated facility will attract discerning travelers who value efficiency and quality service, further enhancing the island’s appeal as a top-tier vacation spot.
I urge you to consider the long-term benefits of investing in a cruise ship dock for Grand Cayman and to prioritize its development as a key component of the island’s growth strategy. With careful planning and sustainable practices, this initiative has the potential to drive economic prosperity, boost tourism numbers, and showcase Grand Cayman’s unique charm to the world.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I look forward to seeing the positive impact that a cruise ship dock will bring to Grand Cayman in the near future.
warm regards,
David Miller
Tour Operator
This is just typical of the cookie cutter approach to everything in this industry.
David, you need to please fact check or you are sounding very much like the misinformed individual you are!
Fact check ? What? The cruise industry has been here since 1937. We need to move with the rest of the world. Cayman was ahead of the Caribbean in cruise tourism. We just got tents not long ago at Royal Watler. Tourists were standing in the sun and rain even on the tenders. We need to step up our game. It’s not the way we treat people especially our customers. The excuse that a docking facility is bad for the environment needs to show where in the Caribbean that it has been BAD for the environment. Anyone that has snorkel around a pier or even a small dock can see that it produces places for soft and hard corals to grow. Which produces new places for fish, lobsters and crabs to have a place to hide.
The argument that we couldn’t handle 20,000 people in George Town was a fabrication. We are now handling over 85-90,000 people in Grand Cayman as population. We are going to go to 250,000 people, I will be dead by then but it’s coming. No matter how high properties go in Grand Cayman they still going to buy. The new condominium next door has been selling for over 20 million dollars US and it not finished yet. Lacovia condos started at 10 million they are passing 20 million and they are getting ready to put in foundation. 10 story buildings will change within 5 years. They going to go up ,up. What products, services do you think children coming out of high school are going to choose from? Fast food or hotels? How many stingray city boats do you imagine will be in business if there is no volume? Are we all going into the fishing business and compete with Central and South America? What’s plan “B”?
The naysayers please respond with a plan that will work ?? You’re young and bright with a BS degree? I await your response.
David Miller sr.
You mean Kenny’s people! We are all Kenny’s people!
No…Kenny’s people are the ones who are voters in GTC…the rest of us are of no consequence so long as Kenny can keep his snout in the trough.
Independent candidates are only interested in their personal well being, not the well being of Cayman .
Don’t try to add to this saying that a pier is better environmentally, what about the coral reefs that will be destroyed for a pier?
Actually, those coral reefs are long gone as a result of decades of ships’ anchors.
Less to do with their anchors, and more to do with the toxic fuels and waste (human and otherwise) that they spew into our waters. But hey, at least they are also polluting our air as well with their constant fumes…?? 🤔
A cruise berthing facility would eliminate the toxic fuels and wastes of the tender boats. 🤫
Chatgpt for the win!
“This next election will be vital to elect persons that are competent, intelligent, honest and have the best interests of the Cayman Islands at heart.”
Who are these people you want to vote in? People keep saying vote the current muppets out but without some new candidates then the old mess will get back in,even with a few votes.
Agreed. Somehow we need to organise district meetings that potential candidates can attend to tell the rest of us who they are and what they would do if we elect them. If it is left to the last minute the current politicians will have the advantage.
people need to understand a vote for a cruise dock is a vote to move the cruise dock and cargo dock to Breakers. Which also means only one road from EE to George Town
And how many roads are there now?
This government has spent 10 times more time choosing their 10,000 calorie daily lunches and the $100,000 SUVs that they demand that government purchases for them than they have considering anything for the Caymanian people.
And the south sound waterfront restaurant has been the beneficiary…added to income from senior civil servants love of expensive red wine lunches.
Caymanians, do not be fooled by incompetent and deceitful leaders.
As is often the case, Kenneth is lying.
As is ALWAYS the case, he doesn’t understand the economy.
He, Julianna, Jonjon and their band of self serving MPs are only looking out for themselves and the rich people who fund them. Andre, Sabrina, Kathy – how do you allow this to happen? You are all culpable in this waste of money.
Insisting on spending a million dollars on a referendum to ask about cruise berthing is absurd. We do not have an economic development plan.
Starting in some random point in the middle is a sure way to get the answer wrong. Start at the beginning.
The country. What is our vision for this country?
And then, what is our vision for the economy, the people, the environment?
Now, let’s look at the Economy. What do we need from our economy?
-Revenue for Government?
-Jobs for Caymanians?
-Opportunities for Caymanian business owners to expand?
-Opportunities for new Caymanian businesses?
Which industries can give us those benefits and at what costs? Can we get those benefits elsewhere and at a lower financial cost that investing in cruise berthing?
What choices do we have? Do the work of analysing other options.
Because it is wrong and deceitful to suggest that if we don’t have cruise berthing those jobs and that revenue will disappear and there is no alternative.
We CAN have a cruise industry without cruise berthing.
Maybe the Hamaty children and the children of other cruise merchants won’t make as many millions as they had hoped to make, but they will still be alright and their children will still be alright. They are already millionaires and better off than most Caymanians.
Caymanians, don’t be fooled. The question is not whether we want cruise berthing or not.
The question is how do we shape this economy to best serve our people? Which industries can generate the greatest benefits for Caymanians, today and in the future, without saddling the Government with debt or destroying our quality of life.
Asking about cruise berthing is _ssbackwards and upside down Kenneth.
It’s not about cruise berthing, so don’t waste our money and our time with this referendum.
Ok poster oh most high and knowledgeable.
Can it be that Kenny is actually expecting a “yes” vote?
We are now into the silly season of the impending election. All the usual bugaboos will be floated. Got to get the more gullible voters excited about the prospect of progress. Nothing ever actually gets done. Cayman can’t do big infrastructure projects because the politicians and their handlers haven’t yet figured out how to get their hands wrist deep in the pies.
Biggest question I have, will this be a public holiday?
As things stand – this entire situation we now find ourselves in is in part due to the fact that CPR did not see the vote through the first time around, the PPM saying they would not proceed with the port project should have had no bearing on whether the vote was held the constitution doesn’t say the government can just opt out of a referendum by backing down on the issue that was raised otherwise there would be no point in people initiated referendums in the first place.
Now we find ourselves back in this same fight a few short years later because the matter was not settled back in 2020 or 2021 when it should have been and when the people had the power to put this issue to rest.
Obviously, the pandemic had some effect on the vote not proceeding but the vote could have easily been held in 2021 alongside the General Election and the fact that they didn’t follow through with the constitutionally mandated vote.
Winning one battle is not the same as winning a war and CPR was short sighted in 2020 and because of it we are right back where we started. Here’s to hoping this time they aren’t as naive.
Blame should not be given to one group of people who are trying, are you part of the group, what are you actively doing besides just ‘blaming’ others. Part of the problem…
Part of the problem?
I didn’t sit back and let the PPM cancel a vote they had no right to cancel.
Direct those concerns at CPR not the people pointing out that they wasted their opportunity to settle this matter and now we are starting from scratch on the exact same fight less than 5 years later.
PPM didn’t cancel the vote. CPR refused to allow it to take place.
Source?
Nonsense – CPR took them to court for trying to play political games with the question and the date of the vote, even after the PPM spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to influence the result by running nonstop ads on the radio and online
Which further begs the question why they didn’t challenge the Gov when they did cancel the vote in 2020
You remember 2020 right? A thing called Covid? How would that have been viewed to have a referendum when the country was in the middle of the pandemic and cut off from the world? I doubt anyone wanted a referendum in 2020.
You remember 2021 right? The election we held as regularly scheduled in the normal format with precautions in place that were safely carried out.
Also I’ll remind you for most of 2020 Cayman had basically no sustained community spread of Coronavirus due to our travel restrictions, strict quarantines and successful masking and testing regimes. The sustained community spread didn’t occur until 2021 (I again point to the fact that had no effect on the 2021 election)
Not to mention Cayman already does postal and mobile voting, those programs could have been modified to safely allow for the referendum to occur but of course, a recurring issue for Cayman, thinking outside of the box and coming up with solutions to issues is frowned upon.
If you are going to try to be a smartass – at least be a bit smart first, otherwise you just look like an…
(note to CNS – I know you all don’t like name-calling but come on this one is mild, throw me a bone)
And what, pray tell, was the end result ?
Don’t kid yourself, that arrangement was all about saving face.
That is incorrect.
CPR cannot direct the elections office to hold any referendum ONLY the elected government and those that direct the elections office and the machinery can do so.
To blame a group of citizens and ignoring the reality of the situation is typical of most verbose key board warriors in Cayman
Who was saying CPR can direct the elections office to do anything? What they could have done is direct their legal representatives to seek a ruling from the court on this matter (which they did not). The Constitution is clear there is no legal mechanism that allows a government to simply set aside a PIR once it is initiated. They sat back and let the PPM do just that – that is on them whether you like it or not.
As usual in Cayman – more criticism is directed at the people who try to point out the failures to ensure they are not repeated and not the actual people responsible for the failures in the first place.
If the CPR group had followed through – we would not be in this situation a few years later a fact that none of you can dispute.
If only you did half as much as Shirley Roulstone and CPR Cayman maybe we would take this diatribe as a show of support.
I am not discounting any of the work they did – I agree with CPR. None of that changes the fact that they arranged a petition, secured a referendum and then sat back and let the PPM cancel it then said nothing and did nothing.
If the job had been completed, we would not currently be facing another vote on the same issue less than 5 years later
That fact is indisputable whether you find it objectionable or not.
Politics are made of these NPOS AND Political waifs, everybody looking for something, haven’t even travelled the world and the 7 seas and all spewing nonsense.
Silly responses were expected, so I am not at all surprised.
-The entire thing the CPR group fought for was a public vote to settle the matter.
-It is true they secured the public vote after months of hard work and for that they should be applauded.
-It is also true that after that occurred, they sat back and let the government scrap the vote which they did not have the right or ability to do and they did not mount any legal challenges to that unconstitutional action.
-We are now back at square one in terms of fighting against expensive and destructive cruise port projects because the matter was never settled.
Kicking the can down the road was not a win – and if you are mad at me for pointing that out you should be furious with the people who allowed it to happen in the first place.
You are close. What in fact took place was that CPR challenged the referendum actually taking place which resulted in it not being held.
https://www.caymancompass.com/2020/02/19/breaking-judge-rules-in-favour-of-cpr-national-trust-in-referendum-judicial-review/
With respect, we are not back to square one. We are in a much better position now than we were before. If CPR’s people initiated referendum had gone ahead, the required votes to win that referendum would have been 50+1% of all registered voters irrespective of how many registered voters actually turned up to vote. The referendum that Kenneth Bryan is advocating now is a government initiated referendum. To win a government initiated referendum objectors to the cruiseship port only need 50+1% of the vote actually cast in the referendum, ie. out of everyone who actually turns up to vote. Which is a much more favourable position to be in for CPR and everyone else who thinks that the cruiseship port proposal is utter foolishness and should be scrapped once and for all. So instead of deliberating on what ifs and buts let’s all put our heads together and work together now to see how best we can win this referendum and blow that ridiculous cruiseship port idea out of the water once and for all.
Well said Anna.
It was NOT CPR’s fault that the PIR didn’t happen. CPR met their marker of 25% of electors, the PIR was finalised, and a date set for the Referendum.
PPM knew the cruise pier would be voted down. PPM then moved up the election several months to preclude the possibility of the scheduled People’s Initiated Referendum from happening. THAT is the way it happened. REMEMBER?
CPR did their job well, even after they had to do it all over again, because the rules were changed. They gathered vetted signatures again, and the Referendum was scheduled.
The electors never got a chance to vote, because of the moved election. REMEMBER?
The ‘moved election’ occurred in 2021 – the canceled CPR was announced in 2020
Aside from being factually wrong – this is also just chronologically impossible
You can rewrite history for yourself all you want. Doesn’t work for the rest of us.
We ought to know that the muster drill is mandatory for all passengers per SOLAS — a series of international standards for the Safety of Life at Sea, adopted after Titanic. The emergency simulation is usually conducted within 30 minutes of the departing embarkation port, triggered with seven short blasts and one long from the emergency horn. By mid-itinerary, passengers reach Cayman, and it isn’t a big deal by then to know how to get to the muster area and disembark in a de-stressed non-crisis manner. They get an extra boat ride to shore which is unusual and overall, pretty pleasant. It also gives crew necessary SOLAS practise in this critical skill zone of getting folks on and off safely. Again, ALL passenger liners must demonstrate they know how, per SOLAS. Once at shore, there are lines and that is the unpleasant part we could do better to improve. Even if there were a pier, passengers would still queue to clear in and out. DOT and CBC/WORC need to audit this part of the arrival/departure experience everywhere – including the airport. They should know which vessels/aircraft flights are expected on the itinerary for a given day, whether they are delayed or canceled, and their expected manifest passenger loads, including disabled passengers. There should be comfortable conditions. It’s not rocket science, but somehow we still fail to optimise this first encounter experience, and it’s an important one, because of the impression that is made (or not). A pier certainly isn’t necessary to demonstrate we value guest/resident arrival experiences. We could start working on that part immediately, and without any vote.
Cayman has not yet fully embraced sustainability standards in the tourism industry, especially in areas such as environmental conservation and community involvement. This may be due to a focus on construction and development, sometimes at the expense of our natural environment, which is crucial to our tourism appeal.
To truly enhance our tourism sector, we must adopt global sustainability standards and integrate them into our development strategies, ensuring a balanced approach that benefits both the environment and the economy.
The Ministry of Sustainability should be empowered with the necessary funding and expertise to lead these initiatives, addressing the current gaps in policy and practice. By working together, there would be the focus needed to create a more sustainable and thriving tourism industry that preserves the beauty of Cayman for future generations.
Bryan continues to parrot the 20+ year FCCA lie that cruise tourism will only continue with a logistically impossible cruise pier, because “they can’t tender”. It’s a fallacy. All cruise ships are equipped with entry/exit doors at standardized international coast guard heights, and lifeboats into which they are required to be designed for and practised in disembarking passengers within a set period of time in case of real emergency. To suggest that large cruise ships don’t have this basic minimum safety requirement, or don’t need to practise and pass (put in place after the Titanic) is garbage, and it needs to called out by a more astute Tourism Minister, if we are to be taken seriously in negotiations as a port of call destination that understands the industry requirements. Most of the Pacific itineraries, with the largest sister ships, tender to every single port of call beyond embarkation terminal. Why don’t our designated advocates know this? Who are they working for? Let’s just vote to terminate Kenny, and any other MP confused about their job, who they work for, and/or with a criminal past. They keep telling us they shouldn’t be in these roles and we should believe them.
This is what is known as a straw man argument. The argument has been that cruise tourism will decline because Cayman offers cruise passengers a shit*y experience. The recent numbers bear this out.
How would you like to wait hours in line to travel a couple of hundred yards and then walk around a ghost town without so much as sidewalks?
Cayman has made it clear they don’t want cruise. It was a wise decision as the numbers are declined across the market, not just Cayman. As was the goal, supplemented by big development and a solid costly marketing contract, high end stayover has replaced cruise as the preferred industry.
We need to transition those few hard-working Caymanians to more profitable opportunities in a different sector and retail businesses need to rethink their old strategies. It might in fact make more sense to pay those struggling operators to stay home rather than wasting money on a harmful industry.
We do not want a cruise port. I thought this issue had already been resolved ?
We want sustainable tourism that doesn’t destroy the environment and clog up our already clogged streets and infrastructure. Focus on stay over tourists (who actually spend money here) and eco-tourism.
I have a great solution to save millions of dollars – Can CNS just do a poll on this ?
Thank you to all of cpr for your courage to speak out
Thank God for Shirley and CPR doing what the do. We need more civic action groups questioning all the poor decisions being made by our runaway government and incompetent civil service.
Public scrutiny is very important and governmental accountability is vital for sustainable good governance.
I signed the CPR referendum and felt slighted by not getting to vote “no” on it.
However, with this the way things are being handled, I now have more concerns and questions than comfort and answers.
Please vote responsibly next election. This next election will be vital to elect persons that are competent, intelligent, honest and have the best interests of the Cayman Islands at heart.
It appears that the Cayman Islands is at a precipice where, unless we start to get rational policies and responsible legislation right as well as ensure that fiscal responsibility is put into practice, we’re a ship headed full steam for the jagged rocks of disaster.
You are right to feel slighted, once the People’s initiated referendum was triggered in 2019 the Constitution does not give a government an option to simply dismiss the PIR or waive the vote. Once the threshold is met they HAVE to do it that is what the Constitution says in plain English, the rights of the people enshrined in the Constitution were infringed in 2019/20.
What the PPM did was unconstitutional. And I don’t care who likes it or how they try to justify it now the CPR group sat back and let it happen instead of challenging it in the courts setting the precedent for future Governments to point to the 2019 petition and process as justification to ignore future PIRs and petitions.
For the avoidance of doubt Section 70 of the Constitution in relation to the holding of a PIR says ‘the Legislature SHALL make provision to hold a referendum’ not “may’ it does not give any Government the ability to simply say – ‘We won’t hold the vote’ it would be a pointless provision if that were the case.
We are now going to have to fight for years to come because this matter was not settled previously when it should have been.
Then sounds like you need to sue the CIG for violating your constitutional rights.