Premier overrules majority to put contested bills on agenda
(CNS): Premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly has overruled the opposition majority of MPs on the parliamentary Business Committee and reneged on a deal the UPM minority government had with the Progressives, who agreed to support the government’s quorum until the election, which is just three months away, if the UPM did not put contentious bills on the paper.
Despite being a minority government dependent on the support of the PPM, O’Connor-Connolly has placed the Referendum Bill and the National Conservation Act amendments on the order paper in defiance of the committee’s majority.
Even though O’Connor-Connolly and her four Cabinet colleagues no longer have a mandate to form policy, draft or present legislation, or even govern, the premier is persisting in her efforts to carry on as if the UPM were still in a majority. But she doesn’t have the political support of the majority of MPs on either the committee or in parliament as a whole, calling into question this country’s long-established adherence to democracy.
Less than two days before Friday’s parliamentary meeting, which will only be possible with the support of the Progressives, O’Connor-Connolly chaired a Business Committee meeting on Wednesday evening and put the bills on the order paper.
André Ebanks, the leader of The Caymanian Community Party (TCCP) and a member of the committee, said that the premier was taking “an unusual and very narrow stance, asserting the Committee’s only role is to set the order of bills — effectively dismissing objections to their inclusion altogether”.
The move might be unlawful, though O’Connor-Connolly is said to have taken legal advice from the Attorney General’s Chambers.
“TCCP condemns this manoeuvre to introduce these two bills as a direct violation of the agreement between the minority government and the PPM,” Ebanks said in a release issued on Thursday. “TCCP remains resolute in its opposition to these two unnecessary and highly contentious bills. The current minority government is a caretaker administration with no mandate for major legislative changes.”
Ebanks said that, given the time left until the elections, the UPM should focus on maintaining the status quo and not attempt to push through contentious bills with long-term consequences for the country and the lives of the people.
“The people should decide the next government, and that government, with a fresh mandate, should determine significant policy changes — not an outgoing administration on borrowed time,” Ebanks said. “We urge the PPM to stand by their agreement with the minority government, that is to only ensure Parliamentary quorum for urgent, non-contentious matters.
“In our view, the circumstances dictate that the PPM has no alternative but to withdraw from its promise to provide quorum because this meeting of Parliament is now set to deal with contentious matters, a clear breach of their original agreement.”
The TCCP team said that they stand in full support of the PPM taking such action. However, the Progressives have yet to comment on the move by the premier. CNS has reached out to the party, and we are awaiting a response.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Politics
Contrary assumptions and assertions aside, the previous election gave the current Parliament the mandate to govern until the Governor prorogues Parliament. If this move is not unconstitutional or otherwise illegal, it falls under that mandate.
Now we hear whinging from those who (rightly in my opinion) feel that pushing these bills without public consultation is not right. The pro-active remedy is to not elect those who would do such things. Once in office the government carries on with a good degree of autonomy. “Damn the torpedoes (and the public); full speed ahead!” is all-too-often the unspoken but quite pervasive policy of governments ‘roun yah.
The bottom line is that a people get the government they deserve, and deserve the government they get.
Do better, people! Having said that, I am not holding my breath expecting any better emerging from the next election.
A very applicable thought come to mind:
“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.” –George Carlin
3 of the Bills being considered have not been published for 28 days.
Brilliant pic LOL how big..pea brains or something else…LOL
Question: is it democratic for a Committee of the House (approx 5 members) to decide what Bills and Motions are debated and voted on in Parliament ? Replace the National Conservation Bill with a Bill to increase Scholarships for young Caymanians. Would it be fair for 5 members to decide that it should not be debated and voted on?
The Attorney General is 100% correct…
Wait, explain your version of democracy again? Because if it is fair for one person to force the Conservation Amendment Bill on despite the committee’s split opinion, then its also fair for one person to deny the committee wanting to list a Bill to increase Scholarships for young Caymanians.
Is it fair that everyone understood the rule was X but now suddenly because you like the title of the Bill to increase Scholarships for young Caymanians the rule is Y?
Democracy is that you vote, according to the rules of the group. Not that you get to change the rules if you don’t like that half of the group are voting against you.
The Speaker is supposed to remind the Premier and MPs when they overstep, and it’s (once again) very telling that’s not happening. Cayman is corrupted to the core. The Attorney General and Deputy Premier likely to be replaced before any hope of clean governance – it’s not just the minority Cabinet du jour.
the irony that she will be part of the “new government” and everyone will forget that she was behind all of this.
Blessed are the drapers because they shall drapeth the premier.
This behaviour by JO’CC is shameful and denigrates Cayman’s democracy.
Democracy is a fool’s choice. There is no such thing as true democracy.
@8:17:
BRAVO! You comment as one who see things as they are, not as what you would like them to be.
I’m convinced this lady thinks she has some kind of holy mandate from God that means she (in her mind) *must* do whatever she dreams up without any input from others (or clearly any constructive cost-benefit analysis).
Don’t be fooled! She’s not a believer in any god. She only believes in the almighty dollar!
and drapery.
Thats the way to lead JuJu, show the quitters that they wont be allowed to ride the fence. All 18 members need to attend, debate, and vote as per their jobs which they are paid to do.
If the majority don’t support the changes then it wont pass, no need to not be responsible or do their jobs.
This is not leadership. It’s dictatorship.
There’s nothing wrong with dictatorship. This idea that it is inherently evil is wrong. If citizens are happy, their lives are comfortable, the country is doing well by most metrics and the leader is benevolent, where is the problem?
In China the CCP is killing it without democracy. I believe it’s because Cayman is in the West’s orbit why we see dictatorship as something awful.
Having said that, JO’CC would not make a good dictator. I would, but you all are not ready for that.
Our democracy is broken and our institutions are corrupted. Nothing short of radical change to our Constitution and our electoral system offers any hope that things will get better.
It is time for change!
Section 44 of our Constitution states that Cabinet shall be made up of 7 Ministers including the Premier. We only have 5 and as a result our Cabinet is not lawfully functioning. There is no prospect of a return to 7 Ministers as no sane person would want to be tainted by association with the UPM.
Almost – The PPM amended the constitution in 2020 there are now 8 Cabinet Ministers not 7
Also the total number of Ministers is 8 but a quorum which is all they technically need to have a valid meeting of Cabinet is 5 which is why they are technically allowed to keep pretending they are running the country
Alden is a master of Parliamentary rules and procedures.
It will be interesting to see how he handles this last Parliamentary session of his career, and based on that, what type of legacy he wishes to have apart.
Does he want to be remembered for authorising a mockery of our democracy?
The speaker is there to keep order not make decisions on which bills get to the floor.
And he’s done a damn fine professional and dignified job of it.
Parliament has the authority to call the Attorney General into Parliament and to question him. In this matter they definitely should if they actually represent the people and not special interests.
People have paid a lot of money to have the Bill to gut the NCA passed by our Parliament.
There was no way that the development cabal and related interests would allow the Bill to die quietly on the Order Paper.
Motion of no confidence?
Questions of Parliamentary privilege which displace any debate on these horrendous bills?
Filibuster?
The opposition has many options if they actually have any interest in stopping the UPM.
Somehow I suspect that this is all theatre staged for our benefit.
Section 71 of our Constitution states that our Parliament must follow the practice of the United Kingdom in matters not expressly stated in Standing Orders.
What the Premier has done is completely contrary to UK Practice and that is therefore un-Constitutional – not that she would be trouble by that.
So disappointed. I like Julie personally. No, I genuinely do. All of her family too. I can’t imagine what would motivate her to try to hamstring us and the next government — which she claims she won’t be part of. Yeah, right. Her and Mac will “retire”.
ChangeSomeChanges
Even our Parliamentary website says that the Business Committee can determine which Bills go onto the order paper. She had no authority to usurp the power of that Committee.
“The items that the Business Committee choose to allow into the Meetings of the House will then go on to the Order Paper outlining the business of the day.”
https://parliament.ky/business/committees/business-committee/
I guess the UPM is entirely above both the law and common sense.
When is the law not applicable to this government – apparently whenever they choose as those who are supposed to ensure that our country has good governance and abides by the rule of law do nothing.
Everything that JuJu and her band of highly questionables have done since Andre left has been on the border of unlawful if not entirely unlawful.
Everything that her Cabinet has done is a probably a nullity.
Now she plans to step into Parliament without a legitimate Cabinet.
Parliament’s Standing Orders section 5(5) expressly states that our current Cabinet is operating outside of the law. Our law says that Cabinet must be comprised of 7 people.
Section 5(5) The Cabinet shall consist of —
(a) a Premier appointed by the Governor in accordance with section 49(2) or (3) of the Constitution;
(b) six other Ministers, one of whom shall be Deputy Premier, appointed by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier, from
among the elected Members; and
(c) the Deputy Governor and the Attorney General, ex officio.
https://legislation.gov.ky/cms/images/LEGISLATION/PRINCIPAL/1997/1997-0000/ParliamentStandingOrders_2024%20Revision.pdf
JuJu has 5 including herself. No doubt she plans to ignore that fact and carry on. Will our other Parliamentarians allow her to continue as part of their collective game?
Where’s the ACC when you need them!?
I understand your argument but to be clear on this you are incorrect since 2020 Cabinet has been comprised of 8 Ministers and 5 Minister are all that are needed for a quorate meeting.
Cabinet does not require all 8 Ministers to be present to function otherwise any one Minister could hold the Cabinet and Government of the day hostage by not showing up to Cabinet meetings
Well, clearly the Parliament have found another set of rules that need some clarification, i.e., what does the Business Committee actually do. (What are the actual rules for them? Conveniently not seeming to be published anywhere easy to find.)
To 5:05pm: Learn to research
https://parliament.ky/business/committees/business-committee/
Had you omitted the first part, I would have thumbed up this comment.
As the OP let me respectfully suggest that if legal advice was taken as reported then there is some set of actual Government rules beyond a ‘simple language’ description on a website (which I was aware of but thank you for trying to be be helpful).
Many Government agencies will post a ‘simple language’ explanation of what they do on their website but the actual Act or Regulations that governs them are often more complex in its construction. Hence the need for legal advice on how to interpret the rules. Also they usually post the actual Act or Regulations somewhere so that people can look up for themselves what the rules actually say. (As it is not unheard of for opinions to vary, or for the simple language explanation to be subtly wrong in edge cases.) For example the Parliament’s Standing Orders are posted on their website. The actual legal document, not just the simple explanations such as ‘no phones’.
What a mess we in!
Rise so high, yet so far to fall
A plan of dignity and balance for all
Political breakthrough, euphoria’s high
More borrowed money, more borrowed time
Backed in a corner, caught up in the race
Means to an end ended in disgrace
Perspective is lost in the spirit of the chase
Foreclosure of a dream
Those visions never seen
Until all is lost, personal holocaust
Foreclosure of a dream
Andre Ebanks clearly showing his lack of knowledge and experience of how Parliament works.
The role of the business committee has always been limited to what order the
business is listed on the a Order paper for each sitting of Parliament.
If the CCP does not like or agree with any clause in any Bill before Parliament it is their duty for which they are highly paid, to raise their concerns in their contribution to the debate and file ammendments which can be voted on in the Committee stageof the Bill.
It would be highly irresponsible and rather juvenile to boycot Parliament because he and his Party don’t like certain clauses in a Bill before Parliament.
The Premier is right and quitter Andre is wrong.
3.15pm – your comment is clearly showing your lack of knowledge of the situation here.
Both the PPM and Andre’s team have said they would block these bills at the business committee stage – are you suggesting that Sir Alan was unaware that they would not be able to do so??
Sir Alden, get it right
Rubbish – our Parliament’s rules are set in law in Standing Orders and section 71 of the Constitution. This move and what the UPM has done since Andre et al left is so far outside Standing Orders that legality cannot even be seen from where they are.
News flash, they ALL want to cut the conservation law, they will juggle it over time, approving bite size pieces over a couple years until it’s all done.
Newsflash: The Cayman Community Party has said that they will not.
News Flash the CCP Quiters Communist Party also said #shewassupported and that they would not work with Mac
Whatever man, do you see who the PPM are working with now? They would sell their own mothers if the price was right.
When you act in accordance with a divine mandate, you do not need democracy. Why should mere people, or even a majority of them, be able to veto what God wants you to do?
++ OFFICIAL TRANSMISSION FROM THE ADEPTUS RIDICULOUS ++
Re: The Premier’s One-Woman Show—Democracy Takes a Backseat
Citizens of Absurdistan! Gather ’round as we witness the latest act in our ongoing political farce. Premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly has decided that the will of the majority is merely a suggestion, opting to unilaterally place contentious bills on the parliamentary agenda.
Who needs consensus when you have self-righteous determination not to mention receive whispers from the Emperor (Or are they from Nurgle ? (The arch chaos god of disease and decay ?) during her daily prayers and flagellations .
The Plot Thickens: Agreements? What Agreements?
Previously, a delicate truce was established:
• The Deal: The Progressives would support the government’s quorum until the upcoming election, on the condition that no contentious bills were introduced.
• The Reality: The Premier, perhaps feeling that agreements are for the weak, has decided to push forward with the Referendum Bill and the National Conservation Act amendments, despite lacking majority support.
A Caretaker Government Gone Rogue
In a functioning democracy, a minority government operates with humility, recognizing its limited mandate. But in Absurdistan, humility is for losers!
• Mandate? What Mandate? The Premier and her four loyal Cabinet members are acting as if they possess an overwhelming majority, disregarding the fact that they are, in reality, a caretaker administration with no authority to implement major legislative changes.
• Legal Advice: It’s rumored that the Premier sought counsel from the Attorney General’s Chambers. One can only wonder if the advice was, “Sure, go ahead! What’s the worst that could happen?”
Opposition’s Outrage: The Caymanian Community Party Speaks Out
André Ebanks, leader of The Caymanian Community Party (TCCP), has expressed his dismay:
• Unusual Stance: He notes that the Premier is taking “an unusual and very narrow stance, asserting the Committee’s only role is to set the order of bills—effectively dismissing objections to their inclusion altogether.”
• Violation of Agreement: Ebanks condemns this move as a direct breach of the agreement between the minority government and the Progressives.
The Call to Action: Upholding Democratic Principles
Ebanks urges the Progressives to:
• Withdraw Support: Given the Premier’s breach of agreement, the PPM should withdraw their promise to provide quorum.
• Maintain Status Quo: Focus on maintaining the current state of affairs until the upcoming elections, allowing the people to decide the next government and any significant policy changes.
Final Verdict: Democracy on Life Support
In Absurdistan, agreements are optional, majorities are irrelevant, and the democratic process is but a quaint notion. As the circus continues, one can’t help but wonder: Is this governance or a grand performance?
++ END TRANSMISSION ++
We are so thankful for our wonderful leaders. Never leave us
sick sick sick sick sick
What crack you smoking bro?
Direct rule is increasingly becoming the only option.
If Starmer presided over us then we’d have a bigger mess
This MINORITY Govt CANNOT be trusted.
When will the Motion of No Confidence be filed?
Does anyone still doubt that these bunch of vultures stand to make something out of passing this bill?! It is obvious they promised to pass it no matter what. Crooks.
OK, this stopped being funny a few weeks ago. Getting scary now. What is wrong with this woman’s brain, or lack thereof?
Devil up inside her tent
It is a distraction to draw attention away from her $50M pet project in the Brac.
Poor Andre really wasn’t ready for leadership. His crocodile tears won’t help him now. He was praying to his Rosary that the Bill would not be debated and voted on so that he could continue pandering to the Pro-port and anti-port lobby groups.
Now he will be forced to expose his real position on the Port and that will piss off one or both groups. He is no match for Julie.
Leaders cant ride the fence Andre!!
Between the Conservation Bill and her ridiculous high school, this woman is hell-bent on shafting the country before she finally steps down. We must not allow her to! Our children and grand children will pay for it if we just sit by and keep quiet.
Voters: Call, write, e-mail, text, whattsapp your MPs and tell them VOTE NO for this bill. You, the voters, are the charge not them. If you keep quiet, and this is passed, you are complicit.
Our home grown version of Donald Trump. We are all saved now! When will the deportations be starting Honorable Labor Minister Jon-Jon?
Unlike Trump, she has no authority.
This appears to be illegal. If the Attorney General’s chambers were consulted and provided advice then that body should state publicly their legal reasoning.
It will be privileged, and only the client (CIG/JuJu) can waive that privilege. By way of example, see this UK Hansard discussion from 2004, and subsequent coverage, about the UK AG’s legal advice in relation to the invasion of Iraq:
Iraq (Attorney-General’s Advice), https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2004-03-09/debates/d3767ca1-cfa5-4e3c-a307-c970ee22890a/Iraq(Attorney-GeneralSAdvice)
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/jun/09/freedomofinformation.iraq
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/jan/26/uk.iraq
It took until 2010 for that to be released: Iraq inquiry publishes legal advice to Blair on war, https://www.bbc.com/news/10463844
Chilcot report: Lord Goldsmith’s legal advice on Iraq war provides lessons in lawyering. The Chilcot Inquiry report on the UK invasion of Iraq in 2003, published in July, dedicates an entire chapter to the legal advice given by the then Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, on the legality of military action. The Inquiry did not (in its own words) ‘express a view on whether military action was legal’. But it did conclude that ‘the circumstances in which it was decided that there was a legal basis for UK military action were far from satisfactory’. Chapter five of the Chilcot Inquiry explores how those circumstances were ‘far from satisfactory’. It provides a fascinating, 169-page exposé of the challenges lawyers face when giving advice. It also raises difficult questions about the role of the chief legal adviser to the Crown, the UK’s Attorney-General. https://www.ibanet.org/article/64bb9449-a904-4c27-ad38-1af7ab2b8cbd
The issue in Cayman however is merely a symptom of an utterly dysfunctional political system. Wendy has noted this in the past:
>> Donkeys, developers and deaf ears, 25 September 2023 <> Ideas and oratory versus ‘fridgocracy’, 23 September 2024 <<
This article critiques the state of democracy in the Cayman Islands, highlighting a pervasive system of "fridgocracy," where votes are bought with gifts and favours rather than won through ideas. This undermines genuine democracy, leading to corruption and diminished political competence. The UK is aware of this but chooses to intervene only when it affects financial services. Wendy calls for action, including educating voters, enforcing anti-corruption laws, and encouraging bright, capable candidates to engage in politics without resorting to vote-buying, in order to preserve democratic integrity. https://caymannewsservice.com/2024/09/ideas-and-oratory-versus-fridgocracy/
Here’s the solution:
https://caymannewsservice.com/2025/01/crises-corruption-and-constitutional-reform/
This wannabe tinpot dictatorship existing as long as it has is a direct result of our immature political systems which have so far failed to constrain a minority government that on its own does not even possess a quorum to hold a meeting of Parliament. Allowing this group to spend public funds, make policy decisions and even present legislation as if they are a functioning government is preposterous.
It also reflects the reality of our political class which is filled with representatives who are more interested in collecting their full term of pay and benefits than they are taking tough jobs and being responsible for governing.
This ‘government’ collapsed months ago – and all of our MPs simply agreed to allow its propped-up corpse to continue staggering on until March so they could get a few months of extra pay and simply because it was more convenient for them personally to not have to deal with an early election not because it was what was best for the country.
Shameful
Get rid and the Attorney General! Investigation needed on all of them!
Borrowed time yes, and more borrowed money ,
Another $150 Million, without mandate .
One of the additional immediate need for cash to pay new planned prison expenses….4 times the cost of her Brac school.
Don’t Stand up PPM or backbenchers let Julie stand alone Julie is a mad woman Same how she jumps and change sides all the time let her try riding all the fences and wearing all her political hats as a one woman circus 🤡 tomorrow
VOTE ALL 19 out ❌❌❌❌❌❌ April 30
When you look up the definition of Conflict of Interest, there should be a picture of the Attorney General.
The “Honorabable Attorney General is the most conflicted attorney in the Cayman Islands. He advises the Civil Service, Cabinet and Parliamemt
You couldn’t make this up!
She needs to go, instantly. Vain, ridiculous woman.
It’s deeply troubling to witness Premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly, who often speaks of her faith and divine guidance, act in such an unprincipled manner regarding the National Conservation Bill. Her approach to pushing this contentious legislation—without adequate public consultation or education and despite clear opposition—directly contradicts the ethical and moral standards she professes to uphold. This not only undermines the democratic processes fundamental to our governance but also casts a shadow over the integrity expected of our leaders. Her actions reveal a concerning disconnect between her public declarations of faith and the ethical governance expected from a leader, raising serious questions about the sincerity and righteousness of her decisions. ‘Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.’ (Isaiah 1:17) How can one, professing to seek divine wisdom, so blatantly disregard the principles of fairness, trust, and respect for the democratic will of the people?
Same goes for that useless governor Jane Owen. Can’t wait for the twit 🤡 to pack her bags. But she better not give up the beach house or we won’t be getting anyone back!
What crack you smoking bro?
I told you! The devil in sheep’s clothing…
Rather the devil in a a Mumu
Drapes
Please retire today Miss Julie
Just throw her out!
Juju and PPM and UPM are liars
UPM and PPM seem to have struck a deal before the elections.
An insider has stated PPM will attend parliament tomorrow and are “highly likely” to vote with UPM on all matters in Parliament.
Despite their previous on the record positions as recently as November 2004 stated by leader of the Progressives Joseph Hew.
Once again the PPM are proving they cannot be trusted to keep their word and honor its own public positions.
See previous comments from PPM Leader MP Hew
https://caymannewsservice.com/2024/10/hew-referendum-on-cruise-wont-settle-the-issue/
I hope not.
Which insider said that ? Sandra or Ossie?
Typical Juju and her UPM pirates for sale