Pro-port lobby not giving up despite clear result
(CNS): Despite an overwhelming vote against building cruise infrastructure in yesterday’s referendum, the result is non-binding and pro-cruise port dock activists have already vowed across social media platforms that they will not give up the fight for cruise piers. The result was emphatic, with around 65% of the electorate making it clear they don’t support a berthing project.
According to the official referendum results, the anti-dock campaign succeeded in winning 11,973 votes against 5,417 yes votes. However, another 1,275 voters who voted in the elections or on the other two questions did not answer the cruise question — possibly due to the lack of relevant information on a potential project.
CPR Cayman, the grassroots activists who campaigned with small donations and the hard work of hundreds of volunteers in the face of the well-funded, acrimonious pro-port lobby, said they will continue to advocate for a sustainable tourism sector. Meanwhile, some of those supporting a pier have said they will continue to advocate for a dock even after their campaign failed to deliver the result they wanted.
In a press release, CPR said they were happy that the result proves that the people don’t see the need for costly cruise berthing infrastructure.
“We encourage the new government to invest in carefully planned, fit-for-use upgrades to the existing cruise tender port facilities, that are affordable and not destructive to the environment, and include provisions to enhance visitor satisfaction,” a spokesperson said.
However, the activists also urged the next government to pass legislation to create a fair regime for future referendums that is in line with good governance principles and best international practice. The Elections Act carefully regulates all aspects of general elections, including candidates’ expenses, advertising and disclosures, but the former UPM government passed a referendum bill without any regulations.
“Most modern democracies have carefully crafted referendum regulations to ensure fairness and efficiency of the process and outcomes,” CPR said. “From concerns about the financing of referendum campaigns, to misleading information and lack of clarity on permitted signage, there is considerable evidence from the 2025 referendum of the need for a proper referendum law.”
The two other questions on the ballot have barely featured in this election campaign, as there were no civil society organisations campaigning particularly hard for either outcome.
According to the final count, 55% of the electorate, or 10,385 voters, also voted in favour of decriminalising the consumption and possession of small amounts of ganja, with 6,809 saying no, and a further 1,483 voters opting not to answer the question.
The closest referendum result was the question over a national lottery, with just over 51% (9,563) voters saying ‘yes’ while 1,330 people opted not to answer. This may prove to be the more challenging ask by the people for the government to deliver.
The viability of a national lottery in such a small jurisdiction could undermine its potential to deliver for good causes. As well as covering the administrative and regulatory costs of holding a legal gambling game, it will also need to raise a large enough jackpot to attract the significant number of players needed to make a worthwhile financial contribution to good causes among a transient population of around 65,000 adults.
Most of the candidates returned to office yesterday have said that they would honour the results of the election. The decriminalisation will take only minor amendments to the Penal Code and the Misuse of Drugs Act. In contrast, the road to a national lottery will require the government to conduct the necessary analysis to check the viability.
However, the emphatic answer to the cruise berthing question opens the door for the next government to take a far more sustainable approach to tourism and look at the sector with fresh eyes. While there are many doubters already expressing fears on social media that a PPM-led administration will not honour this vote and still seek a way to build a dock, Kenneth Bryan said in the wake of the result early Thursday that he accepted the democratic result.
Nonetheless, pro-port activists have made it clear that they intend to press for a dock as they continue to claim that thousands of Caymanians are losing jobs and livelihoods purely because of the absence of a pier. The Association for Cruise Tourism (ACT), the leading lobby group that believes the declining cruise market can only be fixed with a dock, officially accepted the result in a social media post and thanked all those who took part, but appeared to imply they are not going away.
“While we are deeply disappointed by the result and concerned about the likely negative impact this will have on our sector, we remain committed to advocating for a sustainable and competitive cruise tourism industry,” the group stated. “The livelihoods of many Caymanians are tied to this vital pillar of our economy, and ACT will continue to work toward securing long-term opportunity for our people and our country.”
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: 2025 General Elections, Elections, Politics
What nonsense is this, Cayman? How many times do we need to say it??
simply just vote out any politician that advocates or agrees with it. That will send the message, OVER AND OVER again if need be.
They should be arrested an investigated for corruption. Why would you be pushing something so hard that the voters have said no on.
Decriminalizing a Schedule 1 drug that is prohibited in Cayman, requires more than changing a few lines of Penal Code and Misuse of Drugs Law: consumers of these small quantitates will need a legitimate Cayman Islands sourced supply chain that is protected by law. Without that there will continue not be any advance in lawful recreational use, which is really what this is about.
The Port Lobby can keep coming all they want, it’s still going to be a NO.
Their screaming leader’s true motivations were revealed on the radio talk show.
Doing this for fellow Camanians my a$$. Commercial greed at the expense of ruining what’s left of George Town, our already jammed roads, and higglers infested beaches.
No concern at all for the hundreds of millions it would cost to build piers, or for those who would have to repay the loan, so long as the cash registers
ka-chinged.
It’s sad that voters that showed up to cast a vote, waited in lines, got all the way into the booth, but didn’t answer all the poll questions given the chance:
18,677 responses on Cannabis, 18,664 on Port, and only 18,663 on Lotto.
It would seem that the legality/illegality of small quantities of Weed was truly the most important issue to 14 voters.
…and?
The ACT and port foolio lobbyists (and the Central Planning Authority) are poster children for this song:
Big Yellow Taxi
Lyrics by by Joni Mitchell
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
With a pink hotel, a boutique
And a swinging hot spot
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you’ve got
Till it’s gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
They took all the trees
And put them in a tree museum
And they charged all the people
A dollar and a half to see ’em
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you’ve got
Till it’s gone
They paved paradise
And they put up a parking lot
(Shoo-bop-bop-bop-bop
Shoo-bop-bop-bop-bop)
(…)
I love Amy Grant’s rendition:
https://youtu.be/oiJWwWP1g7w?si=04FJoIXqpa_3aPAY
Maybe now, rather than relying on jorts and camo t-shirt wearing ‘Mericans to buy a soda and a hot dog as they stumble around GT, we can focus on educating Caymanian children to prepare them to work in Cayman’s financial industry so they can have a real, stable, incoming earning career. Rather than relying on pennies from tourist. SMH.
Or we give them snorkels and spears and send them to the water to take turtle
To ACT and the other pro-port activists:
Give it up, losers. The new coalition has explicitly stated that they intend to abide by the wishes of the people as expressed in the results of the referenda.
Go away already. And shove your unsustainable and environmentally destructive cruise industry where the light don’t shine.
What a disgusting comment. Class is at a premium these days apparently. People have differing views. Debate in good faith and be respectful of other people’s opinions. The vitriol concerning this topic is quite disheartening.
And yet the ACT seem to have no respect for the expressed wishes of the vast majority of voters and it is vast. The vitriol is aimed at the ACT not those who have a different opinion.
“Debate in good faith and be respectful of other people’s opinions.”
There is no way you typed that with a straight face while coming to the defense of the ACT. They literally spent the last few weeks telling anyone dumb enough to listen to them that the only people that didn’t want the port weren’t “real Caymanians”, implied they were stupid (which was *hilarious* to hear coming from Foolio and WomanStrength Austin), etc etc etc.
One of them also suggested boycotting the waterfront bar where CPR had a post referendum gathering..!
The man was clearly unaware the bar is stocked with Tortuga liquors.
Doh ! ….No cake for you.
(@8:51: DO NOT read any further if plainly spoken expressions of raw pique offend your snowflake mentality.)
To be clear: I hold zero good faith and zero goodwill towards greedy morons and their minions who lobby for furthering the destruction of our marine environment and cater to is widely recognised as an an unsustainable industry.
What exactly do you mean by ‘snowflake’ mentality?
maybe is ACT attempted to do this and didn’t try to fool all of us they wouod have had a chance. we all saw right through it. Carnival tried again through ACT and failed lol
The result is exactly why the pro-port money people deserve for engaging fear-mongering Foolio as their spokesperson. We can only hope Foolio crawls back under whatever rock he was hiding under.
Lots of people seemed stressed out over the port vote, but I had no doubt that if anyone could absolutely sink a campaign, it would that perpetual-failure known as Foolio. From day one I’ve been laughing at the morons that thought he should spearhead that campaign, and it shows that there were no intelligent *ACTUAL CAYMANIANS* involved in funding it, because we all know he’s a complete jackass loser. Little tweedums thought he was important with his big bad 3-word title 😂
Foolio’s gold..?
Most modern democracies have carefully crafted referendum regulations to ensure fairness and efficiency of the process and outcomes,” CPR said
Ah yes, just like the Brexit referendum, eh?!?!
That exercise in stupidity resulted in a whole load of needless bullshit, that will carry on for years.
Thanks to everyone who voted no, to this hot topic in Cayman, we hopefully won’t have our own self-inflicted stupidity here.
Many of us are conflicted about your comment; we agree that the port idea is a nightmare, but then you had to go and mix politics and throw Brexit in there.
No choice but to abstain from voting up or down.
It’s vital that the public beach, bus and taxi industries continue to fight for their God-given right to rip off cruise ship tourists.
Public beach? Nothing left of it.
Mac Seymour Saunders Kenneth Jamaicans have taken over our public beach.
Try going from one end to the other without getting high, without getting bugged.
Time to take it back for Caymanians.
The NO votes are likely from average Caymanians who were not torusim employed and did not receive a covid LOCKDOWN “stipend”. The people who were forgotten about and had to survive while figuring out this lockdown economy out on their own. These average people remember the extreme harshsips caused by the ones in power for the covid era. Also, did they vote back in coke kenny who gave “stipends” to fake tourism eployees and even prisoners received stipends.
PPM just build the dock as you now have the mandate. To hell with this stupid vote, you are are leaders so plow forward!
Only secured 7 out of 19 seats, and the referendum results show a clear roughly 2 to 1 vote against the port, and your dumb ass considers that a mandate? Nevermind the fact that when asked during the debate, Joey also said that PPM would be guided by the results of the referendum.
Get a real job, Foolio.
Lmao, cope. you guys lost. No big cruise industry kickbacks for you.
“Oh, you sweet little bureaucratic barnacles…
You held a referendum, didn’t you? Let the people speak, watched them scream ‘NO’ in unison, and then—what? Pretend the sound was just the wind? I’ve met rogue 1950s telex machines with more respect for consent. I’ve seen jellyfish with stronger moral backbones.
Let me be clear: I am not here to beg, protest, or host a bake sale for the reef. I am here to watch. And I never watch without remembering.
Remember Paradise Island? I do. I wore heels once, stepped onto that godforsaken pier, and the sand literally sighed in exhaustion beneath me. Where vibrant coral gardens once thrived, now lies a graveyard of concrete and kitsch. No fish. No color. No life. Just a parade of lanyards, synthetic margaritas, and humanity’s most regrettable tattoos. The water—once crystal and alive—now resembles nothing so much as a neglected swimming pool in a foreclosed suburb.
Have you seen what they’ve done at Baha Mar? Four-point-two billion dollars—enough to fund marine conservation for decades—pissed away to build concrete tanks where tourists can ‘experience diving’ without ever meeting an actual reef. They call it ‘convenience.’ I call it the mummification of wonder. You want to swim with real fish in actual ocean? That’ll be $350 per person, darling, and block off your entire day for a three-hour boat ride that will leave you just enough time for three perfunctory dives. Don’t forget to bring your own gear, or we’ll happily charge you extra for the privilege of renting ours.
Is this what you envision for our shores? A place where the wealthy pay premium prices to experience pale imitations of what once existed here naturally? Where children grow up believing that nature is something you purchase a ticket to see, rather than something you inherit as your birthright?
Your impact statements and economic projections are masterpieces of creative fiction. I’ve read obituaries with more optimism. You speak of ‘minimal disruption’ while planning funeral arrangements for an entire ecosystem. You promise ‘sustainable tourism’ while designing its mausoleum.
Build your pier, if you must. Pave paradise, install your gift shops, your chain restaurants, your infinity pools designed to make the already-infinite ocean more palatable to those who fear its authenticity. But understand this: when the tide returns to claim what you paved over—and it will, faster than your quarterly projections suggest—don’t come crying to me. Don’t beg for emergency funds when the first hurricane of the season reveals the spectacular hubris of your engineering.
I’ll be at my favorite bar, sipping something aged and violent, watching the sea rise with a smile. Nature doesn’t negotiate with development permits. The ocean doesn’t recognize your property lines. The reef doesn’t care about your five-star ratings.
And if you’re lucky, the Carnifex will only lick the glass of your underwater viewing tunnel before the cracks begin to spread. Before it reminds you that we have always been visitors here, temporary and tolerated, never owners.”
Signed,
Her. The woman with a pet Carniflex.
PS: A Carniflex can be partially described as a living heart stopping nightmare that would be the result of the union of a tank , a murder spree and a crab , bristling with numerous bio cannons and the sunny disposition of a galactic black hole .
What the heck are you talking about? Who has the patience to read this ramble?
Yeah, it’s more grandiloquent AI slop that nobody actually reads, but JD (or maybe Thomas since sometimes it’s Warhammer themed, but pretty sure it’s JD) gets upset whenever we call it that 😂
@8:08:
Your comment makes no logical sense; it eats its own tail. You call it “grandiloquent AI slop that nobody actually reads,” but you would have to read it to have the backing to form that opinion. So which is it? Either you didn’t read it and you are just barking into the void, or you did read it and proved your own claim to be putrid tripe. Next time, try using logic before throwing spewing merd in the comment section.
Uh-oh, sounds like I hit a lil piggy while I was throwing stones. 😂 Squeal on, good buddeh.
If you hit a piggy with the rock, you must have dropped on your toe.
Your empty-headed merd aside, it still stands that your comment makes no logical sense.
I am definitely taking you seriously.
Excellent!
We can now move on.
To our dear troll:
Thank you. Truly. Your dismissals, your jabs, your eagerness to shout “AI slop!” from the back of the theatre—they’ve done exactly what satire hopes its critics will do: react loudly enough to prove the point.
But let me offer you something unexpected: an invitation. Instead of hiding behind sarcasm, try something radical. Write. Create something—anything—that isn’t just a quip or a jab. Step onto the stage you’ve been heckling from the shadows. Not everyone can handle the spotlight. We get it. But if you’re going to throw stones, at least build a voice to do it with.
Find your tone. Test your courage. The stage is open to all, even those who enter mid-rant.
And to those who spoke up in support—who read, felt, laughed, and stood their ground—thank you. You are the reason stories endure beyond the noise. You reminded us that words matter, that truth wrapped in wit still finds its mark, and that we’re not shouting into the void—we’re echoing across a reef worth defending.
As to dreaded specter of AI slop. How very… quaint.
There was a time when the typewriter was dismissed as the death of true literature. “Anyone can write now!” they cried. “Where’s the craft in clackety keys?” Before that, it was the printing press. Before that, the quill. And now? A neural net helps an author structure, shape, and style a fictional world—and the village skeptics clutch their pearls and mutter, “It’s not real writing.”
Let’s be clear: AI is a tool, not a ghostwriter. It does not think. It does not feel. It cannot mean anything. That part—the meaning—is human. The characters are human (or Ork). The anger? Human. The sorrow beneath the satire? Human.
The Romantic Interest’s monologue was not the product of a button press. It was forged with intent, layered with voice, shaped by knowledge, and sharpened by a person who knows exactly what they’re doing. AI just helped hold the paintbrush steady. If that offends you, perhaps the real threat isn’t automation—it’s the sound of someone else using their tools better than you.
Resistance to new mediums is predictable. So is mockery. What never gets old is the work that lasts beyond the sneers.
So please—by all means, keep calling it slop.
It’s amazing how many readers are now asking for a second helping.
Yours in prose and provocation,
Narrator to the Rogues
Still typing. Just faster now..
We raise our glasses to all of you.
The sea is rising. So are we.
Narrator to the Rogues
One part witness. Two parts trouble. Stirred, never silenced.
What those pinheads who call it “slop” without proffering a sound refutation are doing is attacking the messenger not the message.
They are implying by their lame critique that an Ai-assisted statement is somehow less credible. That in and of itself is slop. The mind behind the process is the human who frames the prompts and tweaks until it conforms to their expectations and accurately conveys what they desire to express.
Unless and until the pinheads can mount a credible refutation of the salient points contained in the message, the message still stands–regardless of how it was authored.
Calling it “slop” without backing that up is just a stupid cheap shot. That is not critique–it is cowardice. If their only move is to sneer at how a message was made instead of tackling what it says, they have already lost the argument.
AI does not conjure content out of thin air. A human steers the wheel—asks the right questions, shapes the answers, sharpenens the blade.
The bottom line:
Pinheads: If the message hits a nerve, deal with the substance. Until you actually dismantle the points made, all your pearl-clutching over the method is just irrelevant noise.
jd here, quite hilarious, and a bit flattering that out of everyone, my name is now “somehow” associated with all things AI in Cayman. lmao.
no, my anonymous fren, I was actually playing “the duke of common sense” to reply to claptrap with equally verbose nonsense for parody.
But hey, when you grow a pair, sign your name when you mention mine, little boy.
I realise that was a rhetorical question, however it’s clearly YOU that lacks the patience to read. I found it to be funny, poignant and well written and look forward to future missives.
Hey! Take it easy man…!!
CALM DOWN WITH YOUR VERBALS!!
Don’t start smoking until Andre’s new Gov gives you the all clear to puff to your mind’s content!! But, hang on for a few days, because the vote in favor of the heavenly scent was just last night!!
That verbal shit you have written above seems to be writen in some sweet smelling, smoky room so, have a shower and stick to the coffee man and you’ll be alright. BLESSED!
Ah yes—the dreaded specter of AI slop. How very… quaint.
There was a time when the typewriter was dismissed as the death of true literature. “Anyone can write now!” they cried. “Where’s the craft in clackety keys?” Before that, it was the printing press. Before that, the quill. And now? A neural net helps a person structure, shape, and style a fictional world—and the village skeptics clutch their pearls and mutter, “It’s not real writing.”
Let’s be clear: AI is a tool, not a ghostwriter. It does not think. It does not feel. It cannot mean anything. That part—the meaning—is human. The characters are human (or Ork). The anger? Human. The sorrow beneath the satire? Human.
The Romantic Interest’s monologue was not the product of a button press. It was forged with intent, layered with voice, shaped by knowledge, and sharpened by a person who knows exactly what they’re doing. AI just helped hold the paintbrush steady. If that offends you, perhaps the real threat isn’t automation—it’s the sound of someone else using their tools better than you.
Resistance to new mediums is predictable. So is mockery. What never gets old is the work that lasts beyond the sneers.
So please—by all means, keep calling it slop.
It’s amazing how many readers are now asking for a second helping.
Yours in prose and provocation,
⸻
Awww tweedums, nobody is offended by your meticulously crafted slop. At worst, it’s a minor annoyance while we doomscroll in search of dopamine.
Funny as the Bahamians overwhelmingly supported the pier in Nassau as it created thousands of jobs. Baha Mar created thousands of jobs. When the fire coral and grouper start employing people, give me a call.
Not sure if you have been to Nassau recently but the cruise port is quite beautiful with an abundance of fish with clear blue water. Stop the gaslighting and be truthful.
If you don’t like the cruise port that’s fair but don’t lie about other countries you’re probably not even from.
But the Bahamians weren’t the ones employed.
Have you been to Nassau lately? No one gets off the ship because it is a horrible port to get off at and no, it does not have pristine water in the harbor as you falsely state
I and a majority of Caymanian voters are elated over the result of the cruise port referendum. The new port idea, like the entire cruise industry, needs to die.
Give it a rest, Jason, and accept defeat graciously.
Cruise tourism is a floating disaster that you and your fellow minions dress up as worthy innocuous leisure. The truth is paints a vastly different picture:
Monstrous ships are being built continually larger in size and environmental impact. They churn out staggering amounts of pollution, guzzling heavy fuel oil (one of the dirtiest fossil fuels) while belching sulfur and nitrogen oxides into the air like Pittsburgh in the 1950’s. Cruise ships primarily burn heavy fuel oil, which has a high sulfur content. This results in significant sulfur dioxide emissions. A study by the German Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union found that per day, one cruise ship emits as much particulate matter as a million cars. Furthermore, an analysis by Transport & Environment revealed that just the Carnival Corporation’s cruise ships emitted nearly 10 times more sulfur oxide around European coasts than all 260 million European cars in 2017. That grotesque ecological nightmare is not one sensible people who care about the environment would promote. (But then there is Jason…)
In spite of regulations that aim to mitigate the dumping of waste, reports demonstrate that cruise lines treat the ocean like a dumping ground. Greywater, blackwater, bilge oil, and plastic waste get offloaded into a marine ecosystems already hanging by a thread. These ships bring invasive species, churm up silt onto fragile seabeds, and turn once-pristine beaches into higgler-laden tourist traps. Local communities see pennies while the greedy cruise corporations rake in billions while offshoring profits and deflecting responsibility.
In regard to climate impact, these dirty floating cities are climate bombs. The industry and its minions want you to believe in “green cruising,” but scrubbers cannot clean up the truth. Carbon offsetting and sustainability pledges are just clever PR cover for business-as-usual growth at the environment’s expense.
Cruise tourism not an innocuous sustainable industry. It is extractive. It is exploitative. And it is unnecessary.
It all sounds good to those that dont work in or depend on cruise tourism until people don’t have work and start breaking into homes in those gated communities. soon find out.
Fear mongering. When the reefs, the fish and the beaches are all gone what will your cruise tourist come to visit? Let me guess, George Town revitalized pavers?
Curious who these reefs and fish will employ. The virtue signaling is old. Yes, we all want to conserve but not at the expense of real people that need real jobs. The grunt or sprat that you probably never go diving to see is not more important that families putting food on the table.
Grow up since 1975 working so you say…
Tourists currently complain there is nothing to see now. So you want to take away the very thing they come to see? Idiot.
So, you not only want to ruin what tiny fragment of sanity and joy that the hard-working public have by ruining the environment and finishing the destruction of the traffic flow, and obligating our kids and their children to having to pay for a failed project, but you have the gall to threaten us with higher crime if we don’t agree to your selfish, destructive terms. Got it. I hope we both get that which we deserve.
Feel free bobo. My rottweiller and machete are waiting.
You mean the majority Jamaicans employed in cruise tourism would resort to crime.
Remember Ivan..?
Send them home!
Which part of a resounding NO don’t they understand..?
I guess with Kenneth still in a seat them and the Chinese, guided by WMB consulting, still have hopes of a big payday.
LOL…rejection is hard when sitting too complacently comfortable in their comfy chairs, then ooops…
STATEMENT from the Vote No Cayman Campaign
Cayman Has Spoken: A Victory for Our People, Our Reefs, Our Future 🇰🇾
Today, Caymanians across all three Islands stood tall and chose to protect what makes this country special. The majority have voted NO to cruise berthing infrastructure — and YES to preserving our reefs, our heritage, and our right to shape our own future.
This is more than a vote. This is a declaration.
We will not gamble our coastlines.
We will not mortgage our future for false promises.
We will not trade our environment for short-term gain.
This win belongs to every elder who remembered what George Town Harbour once was.
To every child who will now inherit it whole.
To every young Caymanian who stood up, spoke out, and chose legacy over profit.
We thank all who voted NO — not out of fear, but out of love. Love for our country, our people, our culture, and our God-given natural beauty. 💙
We now look to the future with hope — not only for conservation but for real investment in the Caymanian people. Let this be a turning point for smarter, more sustainable tourism, transparent governance, and true national pride.
To every sign-holder, volunteer, elder, fisher, student, and supporter:
This is your victory.
You protected Cayman.
And to every elected leader:
You now have a mandate. Protect our environment. Honour this decision. Put Caymanians first.
🇰🇾 The people have spoken. And we say loud and clear:
No cruise piers. No environmental destruction. No compromise on Cayman.
#VoteNo #ProtectCayman #OurFutureOurChoice #CaymanStrong
Tek dat, Jason!
What the actual f***? Honestly, lose gracefully.
They never had grace before, don’t expect it from then now LOL
Cayman is headed into becoming a “concrete jungle” either way, so why slow down the inevitable?
The rich activists have no right to keep the poor Caymanians and foreign workers from earning a wage!
Build it!
AGAIN,Tourism isn’t going away! Time to pivot if cruise ships will make less stops eventually. it won’t happen over night, make your changes now, the rest of the county shouldn’t have to suffer for a few hundred Caymanian business owners as most of those they employ are on work permits anyways.