CPR not asked to contribute to Referendum Hub
(CNS)The Cayman Islands Government has created an online Referendum Information Hub as the central platform for the public to access official information, records and data related to the upcoming referendum. This webpage is designed to provide transparency and ensure that voters have access to key details that can help them make informed decisions.
However, activists from Cruise Port Referendum Cayman (CPR) were not asked to submit any of the information they hold about the downside of cruise berthing facilities for the most controversial question on the ballot.
Because there is no stand-alone referendum legislation that provides the rules for people-initiated or government-initiated referendums, the outgoing UPM administration is using public funds and other resources to promote its view that berthing facilities would save the declining cruise sector.
The hub includes only the research, speeches and information that the CIG has compiled to justify piers, including recent speeches delivered by Tourism Minister Kenneth Bryan in parliament.
“As new details become available, this page will be updated on an ongoing basis to reflect the latest information, ensuring that you have access to the most current and accurate resources leading up to the vote,” officials said.
However, they gave no indication that the research and data collected by the leading campaign group opposing berthing facilities would be included, such as the potential negative impact on infrastructure and overnight tourism, the financial concerns and the major impact dredging would have on the marine environment.
CPR told CNS they were disappointed that the government is continuing to go down the same path of presenting one side of the argument.
“Despite the government’s claims of seeking a balanced discussion on the upcoming referendum and the question of support for cruise berthing infrastructure, their approach lacks key details and essential metrics necessary for an informed debate,” one of the founders of the organisation said.
“In reality, the current administration’s stance is no different from the previous PPM government (2013–2021), with both prioritising development at any cost — disregarding the environmental, financial and socioeconomic consequences for the Cayman Islands.”
The activists accused the CIG of following the cruise lines’ agenda instead of taking a practical, long-term approach in the best interest of the country.
“The only difference between today’s discussion and that of 2018–2019 is the complete absence of substantive information or data to educate the public and voters. It is both unreasonable and unrealistic to expect Caymanians to support a project with no clear vision, no detailed plans, and no transparency on costs, environmental impact, additional infrastructure needs, or the islands’ carrying capacity,” the spokesperson added.
The activists have long argued that voters need comprehensive and objective information, as only full transparency will allow voters to make an informed decision for this non-binding referendum, which could set the stage for the most expensive and environmentally destructive capital project in Cayman’s history.
In a recent report, the Office of the Auditor General noted that government’s pursuit of a cruise dock could push the country further into financial instability, given the amount of very costly projects that the UPM government has already embarked upon during this administration or was planning to start — projects that are likely to be picked up if members of this government are re-elected under the PPM banner.
Although the hub is not neutral, it does include detailed explanations about all three of the questions and explains what a referendum is and how this government-backed vote is different from a people-initiated referendum.
It also states that as a non-binding ballot, the results of the vote will show public opinion, but the government will decide whether to act on the results or not in the case of all three questions.
The government has said that if the people choose to decriminalise small amounts of ganja, it can act quickly to introduce administrative fines for possessing small quantities and prevent Caymanians being refused work because of criminal records resulting from convictions for this.
However, if voters support the idea of a national lottery, the CIG would have to look into the viability of its introduction, given the size of the market versus the cost to run a weekly or monthly legal draw. Before it rolled out a local lottery, the government would also need to consider how the profits would be distributed and how much it might contribute to gambling addiction problems.
See the government hub here.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Politics
Here is my issue with CPR. They come into a discussion with a made up mind. The fact that they declare themselves “the opposition to the cruise port” means its not fully about if its limiting damage or not. They are just opposed.
I am curious if they took the approach of let’s put our heads together to see if we can find some common ground where maybe not everyone gets what they want but maybe you get something else that helps mitigate the damage.
I would for instance say we would sign off if:
1. These mitigation steps are taken to limit the damage done.
2. 5 million dollars a year for the next 20 years is set aside for dealing with environmental issues related to GT and SMB that could be affected long term.
I mean you can add bringing in special engineers or materials.
You could also lock in that there would be a board that meets quarterly that you would be a major member of that deals with the dispensation of funds.
Try to work together not fight for fighting sake.
You need to shut the eff up. Ken Bryan troll.
This goes against the pre election rules agreed and introduced after the Auditor General did her report on the Overseas Offices after the 2021 election. The rules are designed to give a more level playing field.
Thank you CPR Cayman for asking the right questions and always setting the record straight.
I appreciate all of you and what you do for Cayman to hold govt accountable for ridiculous pier projects that we do not need. This project has all the signs of bankrupting these islands.
Thank CPR for exposing the dirty ways of UPM and the teammates the PPM. People wake up. We cannot have those groups leading these islands ever again!
Kenny and the PPM are the perfect marriage made in Hell for the future of the Cayman Islands.
They cannot be trusted to do anything for the good of the country. They are owned by special interests.
We cannot afford to have them running these islands. Vote No at the polls against PPM and the referendum questions.
Oh yes, we all know about government transparency. It’s called tell us what we only want you to know and block out all the other information sources that CIG doesn’t you to access. This is blatant CIG censorship. Do we really have a democracy or autocracy and where are we, some small island in the South China Sea subject to the totalitarian rule of China? Where is Madam Governor, sorry to disturb your pre-retirement tea party but are you seeing this? Any words or are you happy to let the crickets speak for you?
Pure hypocrisy and autocracy in our fake democracy!
Sorry CNS – I have to disagree with the sentence that says in regards to the UPM/cruise company propaganda website that we the public are paying for: “This webpage is designed to provide transparency and ensure that voters have access to key details that can help them make informed decisions.”
Clearly the webpage was designed to do the opposite – it is designed to encourage the ignorant to vote in favour of what the cruise lines are paying our politicians to get done.
The people are asking for progress on crime, education, the dump and roads. Yet these guys are all fixated on building a port that no business case will ever justify. Just follow the money to see why these politicians are so enthusiastic about this project.
More evidence that we need a People-Initiated Referendum to bring about electoral reform including a system of national voting that will make it harder for special interests to buy corrupt politicians. Until that is done we will have more of this s!+ to deal with on a daily basis.
If the government choose not to represent bith sides this is a clear indication they are not working for the people but special interest groups only. They are also using public money to fight the very people they take it from. Totally disgusting bunch of morons.
Yeah, “my mind is made up, don’t confuse me with facts”.
How the plan of that pier look again?
Oooh, panic, panic, you going down, you know how sign online to WORC?
Let’s see your Resume, Police Records,bank accounts,compa nies, compliance…
I have said it before: The people — probably with the invaluable help of CPR — are going to write and compile data for a PIR to mandate the terms and legality of PIRs.
Otherwise, the government of the day can challenge each and every PIR, because there is no legal framework for the PIR authors to support them.
We need a PIR to determine and enforce the terms of PIRs.
Then, and only then, the people will have an undeniable voice, as determined by the majority of electors.
It’s because they aren’t really asking. We shouldn’t necessarily discount the probability of vote tampering as well. There is no third party qualifying supervision, and no oversight powers, just four passive international observers working on their tan every four years. Don’t make the mistake of discounting how rotten this admin is, or what they might try to pull.
Idiots. More reason to keep out the PPM element, who are intent to sell the next generation down the river.
Nor should they have been. Was ACT asked to contribute?
Officially? Probably not. Behind the scenes as a co-conspirator? You know damn well they were.
The pro cruise pier people have certainly been asking for donations to their cause.
My advice to them is to go to Mac and Kenneth who will be the real winners in all this.
IF …they are elected.
They will win nothing . They need my land. Theyr will not get it.
The land once I get planning permission which is being denied because of the CIG and their conflict, will go into a trust for the people of the Cayman Islands. I first promised this over five years ago. Why does the CIG turn this down. Because they want to fill it with concrete for the new terminal. Not all of us are stupid.
George Town voters. Vote for honest candidates with integrity, not those with police records.
Don’t worry, they’ll just use eminent domain to seize it
thank you Mr. Chris for standing your ground and remaining strong. You might well have a hell of a lot more support than you realise. Any government that thinks they can take you land will be met with profound protest and a very loud collective voice.
big up mr chris
well, there point of view is clearly represented on the site, the point is that the opposing information is being activily suppressed.
perhaps if you want to say it is only for government entities, then maybe they could have asked Department of Environment to contribute? They have reservations about the cruise pier for numerous reasons and have responded to the EIA (Baird Report). Then it would be a far more fair and balanced “hub”.