Mac begs opposition to support the UPM’s bills
(CNS): McKeeva Bush MP has made an unabashed appeal to PPM Leader Joey Hew and other opposition members to attend the parliamentary Business Committee meetings ahead of the scheduled session this month and help get the referendum bill and changes to the conservation law on the order paper for debate.
Speaking at a meeting in his district of West Bay, Bush said that initially, he hadn’t agreed with the referendum because he believed the government should just go ahead and build the piers, but he now wants the opposition to support the bill because of that commitment to build a pier.
Bush was one of several current, former and hopeful MPs who attended the meeting hosted by the Association for Cruise Tourism (ACT), which went to West Bay on Tuesday night to promote the idea of a cruise berthing facility on Grand Cayman given that the district has the greatest number of Caymanian residents who are still working in the tourist sector.
Although relatively well-attended, it was a mixed crowd, with plenty of ACT supporters from across the islands as well as many West Bay residents who remain unconvinced that any sizeable cruise project in George Town is a positive step.
However, as he took the microphone, Bush said that a referendum was unlikely because the PPM was not willing to support the bill. He said there might not even be a meeting of parliament to debate the proposed referendum bill because the UPM administration no longer has a majority on the business committee and is dependent on the opposition benches to form a quorum for any meeting.
“I believe we need proper cruise facilities in this country,” he said, adding that he felt many young people were being misguided about the environmental damage such a project would cause. He said people were hurting and could not even afford food.
But Bush targeted much of his comments toward Opposition Leader Hew, who also attended the meeting. He even tried to tempt him with some kind of support in the upcoming election campaign, though he did not spell out what was on offer.
The veteran West Bay representative explained that the proposed parliamentary meeting scheduled for 30 January may not happen now because the opposition has the upper hand on the Business Committee. The PPM members, as well as those independent opposition members who recently departed parliament, have all said they won’t support the minority government in its attempts to introduce any contentious legislation.
“So it seems that they may not show up for the Business Committee, and if they do, they won’t support the referendum bill,” he said, even though “thousands of young people” had registered to vote because of the proposed decriminalisation of ganja, which is also a question on the draft bill. The third proposed question is on the introduction of a national lottery.
Bush told the audience that if the opposition members didn’t show up to plan the agenda, there would likely be no agenda or order paper and no meeting of parliament.
“So to the honourable leader of the opposition, my good friend Joey… I was thinking about giving him some support… but I don’t know, we’ll see how he behaves himself,” Bush said. “I don’t know what they are talking about with controversial legislation; I don’t know what they are afraid of,” he said.
He said the PPM had tried to develop a port even after “licking me to pieces” for his attempts during the 2009-2013 UPM administration to get a cruise port project off the ground. “Don’t buy the [Progressives’] fool-foolness,” he said and again urged Hew to attend the meeting.
“Come get your seat on the Business Committee. Come and make up the quorum. Come and put the order paper together, and come into parliament and do what you all know is right, and that is to get us the referendum and get us the vote,” Bush said.
Bush, who is still a backbench member of the minority government, said the UPM was “in a serious predicament”, and the campaign for the cruise port “might all be for naught if they don’t come and do their part”. He asked Hew to dismiss those who didn’t support it, indicating that even though many people did not support him throughout his political career, he still won.
Repeatedly begging Hew to attend the Business Committee meeting, Bush also urged Andre Ebanks to come as well, suggesting that they could all vote against the bill after the debate parliament if they still did not want to vote for it. “But I plead with you, change your mind!”
Tourism Minister Kenneth Bryan, who championed the referendum bill, told the meeting that the likelihood of it being passed through parliament was now remote. He said this was why the government had not begun the education and awareness campaign, explaining that he would not waste public funds if there was not going to be a referendum.
The meeting had been opened earlier in the evening by Ellio Solomon, who is now heading up the ACT Campaign in favour of a cruise project in George Town, even though no specific proposal has been put before the people.
Solomon repeatedly called those who don’t support the concept “unreasonable and heartless”. He even suggested that people who don’t support the concept of the facilities or a referendum were both ungodly and unjust because they didn’t back ACT’s position and had a callous disregard for those who depend on cruise tourism for their livelihoods.
However, many of those opposing this referendum believe that the vote should only take place once a project is outlined so that people will be able to properly consider the financial, environmental, social and infrastructure costs against any suggested benefits, especially given the changing shape of the cruise sector.
There is also still a lack of solid evidence that piers make a material difference to the earnings of those who work on the sector’s front line and that the trickle-down economic benefit is often outweighed by the massive impact such a project would have.
Although the current administration is attempting to pose this question as a simple ‘Do you support cruise tourism or not?’, in reality, this is a complex economic conundrum that has never been properly analysed. And as cruise ships turn their products into floating resorts designed to keep people aboard, ports of call are increasingly becoming nothing more than a backdrop for their massive profit margins.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Oh my! Big Mack been working out lookin dam fine in dat muscle shirt.
Move over Denzel like a bootle of aged red wine the Daddy Mack get mo fine
Look out! anytime someone is trying to sell you something “sight unseen” and they start spouting things like: “ungodly,unreasonable and heartless” instead of bringing a proper propsal,you have to wonder why they are working so hard to sell you a Cat in a bag!
There’s always something in it for Mac.
Whoever is backing him to promote their interests , must believe that Mac is still a man of Consequence.
The right thing would be to do the opposite of what Mac is suggesting, it never ends well for Cayman.
Go away Mac
The debate over the United People’s Movement’s (UPM) legislative proposals is an opportune moment to critically assess the economic pillars of the Cayman Islands, the competence and motives of our political leaders, and what is genuinely in the best long-term interests of Caymanians.
1. The value of tourism generally to Cayman
Tourism undeniably contributes to the local economy, providing jobs and supporting small businesses. However, as economist Marla Dukharan recently highlighted in her report Unleashing Cayman’s Potential: A Journey Towards Prosperity and Unity, the tourism sector is not as foundational to our economy as is often portrayed (https://www.caymancompass.com/2024/03/07/economist-tourism-is-not-key-contributor-to-caymans-economy/). It relies heavily on imported labour and resources, with much of the economic benefit flowing offshore. Additionally, environmental degradation linked to overdevelopment threatens the very natural beauty upon which tourism depends, compromising its sustainability.
2. The value of cruise tourism specifically
Cruise tourism is even more contentious. While it generates some revenue, the economic benefit per passenger is minimal compared to stay-over tourists, who spend significantly more on accommodation, dining, and activities. According to government statistics, cruise passengers contribute approximately USD 70 per day compared to USD 500 per day from stay-over visitors. Meanwhile, large cruise volumes strain infrastructure, degrade reefs, and diminish the experience for higher-spending visitors. This imbalance calls into question the wisdom of prioritising cruise arrivals over more sustainable tourism models.
3. By contrast, the value of the financial services sector
The financial services industry is the backbone of Cayman’s economy, contributing roughly 40% of GDP and providing high-value employment opportunities for Caymanians. It requires a highly skilled workforce, fosters upward mobility, and generates significant government revenue. Unlike tourism, the sector does not rely on environmentally damaging practices or significant imported labour. Ensuring the industry’s global competitiveness should be a political and economic priority.
4. The competence, integrity and motives of Caymanian politicians
Concerns about political integrity and short-termism abound. Recent criticisms of certain MPs, such as their focus on material inducements over meaningful policy debates, highlight a worrying trend (https://caymannewsservice.com/2023/09/donkeys-developers-and-deaf-ears and https://caymannewsservice.com/2024/09/ideas-and-oratory-versus-fridgocracy/). Furthermore, Minister Kenneth Bryan’s mixed results in managing tourism underscore the need for clear, evidence-based strategies (https://caymancompass.com/2024/07/bryan-denies-any-failings-over-tourism-policy/). Politicians must prioritise policies that serve the long-term interests of Caymanians, rather than pandering to external developers or lobby groups. Under the current electoral system however, this unfortunately seems unlikely.
5. Recommendations for Caymanians’ long-term interests
To secure a prosperous future for the Cayman Islands:
• Shift focus away from cruise tourism and towards high-value, low-impact stay-over tourism, with robust environmental protections to preserve our natural assets.
• Invest in education and skills development to ensure Caymanians can fully participate in the financial services industry, reducing reliance on expatriate labour.
• Implement policies that prioritise sustainable development, balancing economic growth with environmental stewardship.
• Enhance political accountability through a reformed voting system, amended eligibility for electoral office (e.g. no criminals), transparency measures and campaign finance reform to ensure decisions are made in the public interest.
Cayman stands at a crossroads. Caymanians need politicians who can demonstrate the vision and integrity to make decisions that benefit future generations, not just their own short-term self interest. We cannot afford to sacrifice the long-term wellbeing of Caymanians for transient gains in tourism and poorly conceived development schemes.
Cruising berthing is a waste of money and not a priority for Cayman
Couldn’t make it up.
Kenneth should not be allowed to spend public money on a campaign even if the referendum is here.
A standalone piece of legislation to govern all referendums needs to be enacted to ensure the standards of good governance are upheld.
McPisser up to his Deviltry again! Get thee behind me Satan! Retirement looms for you.
f***ing Honourable Bush is such trailer park trash, absolutely disgusting..
VOTE NO
Any projects or laws that McKeeva and Bryan are desperate to have will become an expensive mess for these islands and sound like really bad ideas. You can smell the corruption from here.
is there any example of any Caribbean Island that has financially benefitted from throwing themselves into multi-generational debt to build a cruise pier?
Let’s VOTE ALL 19 out starting with him. HE Should have been long gone 25yrs ago..
It’s time Cayman TIME FOR CHANGE ❌🆘❌
The only seriously misguided person is Mr. Bush, his lack of knowledge and his self serving interests have created what we have today in cayman . He must not be re-elected into any position . Only the top 1% of caymans high earners are loving life , the rest of the population are struggling . No cruise pier providing for a handful of his voters low paid jobs is going to improve life for them.
Mac, STFU
shameless to the end….
Both sides have valid points. Problem with the cruise lines themselves is that we are hearing how the local market is being forced to increase their fees as they cannot operate at a profit once the cruise takes its share for marketing the attraction, etc. It is feast or famine in the tourism industry. The cruise lines are advertising specific vendors and attractions that are guaranteed revenue while the smaller operators relying on social media platforms like Trip Advisor, Facebook etc. hope to get bookings on their own.
Same old story – those with connections and deep pockets crowd out the smaller operators. This applies to the majority of business in Cayman. This is why there are fights on the beach as they are all after what is left of the pie.
So to say build it and they will come is alot of crap! If you can’t resolve some of the issues mentioned above then who are we building the port for????
The failed PACT and UPM governments are clueless how to negotiate these talks with the cruise industry so why should the PPM opposition come to their aide?
The ACT folks would be better suited to help local participants in this industry by pushing the cruise lines to share more of the tour fees with the actual operators rather than pushing for a pier.
Maybe a government should mandate that no on shore activities can be sold on board.
Bunch of screaming banshees