Editorial for 20 December: A ‘minority’ government?

There are arguments for and against forming a ‘minority’
government in the wake of Premier McKeeva Bush’s ouster.

A minority government means that government will have less
than the minimum of eight members normally required for a legislative majority.

On balance, we believe the arguments against forming such a
government outweigh the benefits of doing so.

A minority government will not help foster security or
certainty regarding public sector decisions over the next five months. There
are a number of things that the Cayman Islands needs to get done, or at least
decide upon in the near term. How much chance do readers believe items like the
ForCayman Alliance agreement, the national pensions reform, immigration reform
and the port negotiations have of being taken care of properly under such a
hodge-podge arrangement?  We are now
depending, more than ever, on a group of legislators to work together in
partnership – who have never managed to do so in three-and-a-half years.

A decision to call early elections could indeed lead to
several hundred voters being disenfranchised who normally would have been able
to cast ballots on 22 May, 2013.

However, there may also be indecision in how a ‘minority’
government proceeds with any other legislative measures, including the
implementation of new levies upon the financial services industry upon which
the government now depends to make ends meet.

No, we believe the true reason for opting in favour of a
minority government has to do with the United Kingdom wanting to avoid – at all
costs – the continuation of McKeeva Bush as premier. If Governor Duncan Taylor
dissolved parliament, while the Legislative Assembly would no longer be able to
meet, Mr. Bush would still remain as premier until the date of the early
election. That election would have to be called within two months of the

This is a disturbing prospect. The UK would rather set up
what can only be described as a tenuous governance arrangement for the next
five months, rather than risk Mr. Bush getting back into office.



  1. I find your argument that the Governor decided to approve a minority government simply because the UK wanted to be rid of McKeeva as Premier to be tenuous.

    Whilst most people agree that the lack of experience and somewhat questionable qualifications of one appointed to ministerial office is cause for concern, there are perhaps other benefits to be accrued.

    You question the certainty of decisions in public sector projects such as the new dock and the ForCaymanAlliance. I welcome the fact that those decisions, and all the other major decisions, can now only be made with the full cooperation of the majority of the house.

  2. No, we believe the true reason for opting in favour of a minority government has to do with the United Kingdom wanting to avoid at all costs the continuation of McKeeva Bush as premier.

    Well Caycompass…

    If you hadn’t figured that out by now, you’re a day late and a dollar short.

    The timing of this arrest speaks for itself; after 2 years of investigations, this arrest could have come anytime before now…or after the May elections.

    My one gets your ten, that come May, 2013, these investigations will still not be concluded…and McKeeva Bush will still not have been charged with any crime.

    Where Bush has been stupid, exceedingly stupid, as we all know and admit that he is, is to continue to cling to the position of premiere, instead of resigning and keeping control of his political party.

    He’s fallen into a trap that’s been neatly set for him; someone that stupid does not deserve to be the political leader of Cayman, IMO.

    That Bush needed to go, for bigger reasons, is beyond my doubt but those reasons must remain hidden between the lines and let the wise seek and discover them for themselves.

    I can offer one indicator…when Bush decided to do business with the Chinese, his political doom was sealed.

    A minority govt. will only further undermine Cayman’s
    stability and standing in the eyes of the world as a country that could not handle even its first 4 years of increased political power without disintegrating into mayhem and confusion…and the question will remain…

    What does that bode for the future ?

    Governor Duncan Taylor should NOT have given the UDP the option of remaining in power as a minority govt.; he should have done the proper thing by dissolving the government, suspending the LA…

    And set the date for early elections…and himself, run the country by decree in the meantime, until a govt had been elected.

    A tin-pot motley collection of UDP stragglers as govt. ministers only adds a certain ridiculousness to this entirely comical and already ridiculous situation…it makes the neutral want to die laughing, to be honest.

    Taylor has saddled the Caymanian people with a stigma and reputation that they do not deserve because it is Cayman’s voters who should now have the choice of saying who their government is through the ballot box…

    Not some administrative decision of his.

  3. I am confused firey. Are in you in favour of the Governor exercising his executive power to govern us or not? First you say he should be running the country by decree and then you say he should not be making administrative decisions for us. Which is it? Constitutionally the Governor had only two choices: dissolve the LA and call early elections (in which case Bush continues as premier until the elections), or terminate the appointment of the premier and appoint a new premier. He did not have the option of running the country by decree unless the UK suspended the Constitution. And that is the last thing any of us should want.

Comments are closed.