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
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.
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.
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.
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.