Cayman’s minority government risks a parliamentary defeat if it attempts to pass controversial legislation – including changes to the National Conservation Act and a bill for a referendum on cruise piers – before the election.
The seven-member government has been accused of overstepping its powers on a number of fronts just months away from a General Election.
The disparate opposition groups are united in urging the administration to focus only on the day-to-day business of running the islands and leave any divisive issues to the next government to resolve.
The Progressives, Andre Ebanks’ breakaway group, and independent opposition members have raised concerns about the scope of negotiations with the Dart group on a number of issues, including the landfill deal and a potential land swap to help create a national park at Barkers.
Adding further fuel to the fire is the belief that the administration led by Juliana O’Connor-Connolly will also seek to proceed with changes to the conservation law and advance the cruise referendum.
According to statements from multiple opposition groups, the diminished UPM government has support for neither.
Ebanks said, “Such important decisions should be handled by a new Government with a clear electoral majority. It would be more appropriate for the current minority Government to focus solely on day-to-day operations until the April 2025 election.”
A spokesman for the Progressives told the Compass on Saturday that it would not help the government pass contentious legislation at the 11th hour. He also said the party would have concerns about a ‘lame duck’ minority government entering any significant new agreement with Dart.
Asked specifically about the conservation amendment bill, the Progressives’ spokesman said, “We would oppose its introduction to Parliament during the meeting of the House Business Committee, and if that fails, we would vote against it in Parliament.”
The issue explained: Cayman’s minority government
The Progressives are understood to sympathise with the intent of reforming the Conservation Act. But the party’s support for the government to continue – following the resignations of four key members – was contingent on an agreement that it would not bring controversial legislation.
Referendum bills also unlikely to pass
The bills for a referendum on cruise piers and on cannabis legislation also appear to be non-starters.
“With the government losing its majority and former members, including ex-Premier Panton, now firmly opposing the referendum bills, these have become controversial and should not be introduced,” the Progressives’ spokesperson said.
“The situation has been worsened by the government’s delay in publishing the referendum bills until the very last minute and its failure to initiate the promised and necessary education campaign.”
There is no support for the legislation, either, from the group of four MPs who broke away from government.
Ebanks, speaking on behalf of the group, highlighted the bills and the negotiations with Dart as unacceptable. He said the minority government had no standing to advance “significant and controversial matters” that require parliamentary approval and their actions reinforced the key reasons why the four MPs had resigned.
“The transactions and bills currently under consideration were being contemplated prior to our resignation, and we did not wish to be associated with or advocate for them,” he said.
“Despite its diminished numbers, the minority Government appears determined to proceed with these matters before the end of its term, for reasons that remain unclear.”
Dart talks
Chris Saunders, former deputy premier, who split with the administration and is now an independent opposition MP, said he was shocked about the announcement that the minority government was entering such involved talks with Dart.
Government released a statement last week indicating it was hoping to conclude negotiations with the islands’ biggest developer on three issues – the landfill, Barkers National Park and waivers owed to Dart for investment in infrastructure under the NRA agreement – before the general election.
Saunders said the PPM led administration – which was a majority government – had done something similar in 2021, tying the next government’s hands by signing the ReGen deal just prior to the election.
“My opposition to the cost of the Regen project as well as the manner in which it was done is well documented. I haven’t seen anything thus far to change my position.
“With the election date set, this will be an election issue and I want to remind all parties that a current Parliament cannot bind a future Parliament and a current Cabinet cannot bind a future Cabinet.”
No-one from government responded to requests for comment.
Deputy Governor Franz Manderson, who is leading the talks with Dart, also did not comment.
Questions over landfill deal
Government announced Tuesday that it was extending the negotiations with the developer to terminate the landfill contract, known as ReGen.
At the same time, it said it was opening negotiations with Dart over a land swap agreement aimed at creating a genuine national park at Barkers.
Dart currently owns the bulk of the land, including the majority of the beachfront property, on the peninsula. No details were given on what government is considering trading in its efforts to acquire more land at Barkers.
Katherine Ebanks-Wilks, who was sustainability minister – with remit for the landfill project at the time it was abandoned as too expensive in July, said she was concerned by the lack of transparency over the negotiations.
She said the supplementary funds to pay the ReGen termination fee – believed to be around $38 million – had already been approved by Finance Committee and the matter could have been settled well in advance of the 31 October deadline. Now, she said, it had been delayed again and rolled into unrelated matters, including Barkers and some waiver fees apparently owed to Dart in relation to previous infrastructure projects.
“Why was the fee not paid, and the termination settled in cash?
“I am deeply concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability in this process, particularly as it now appears to involve land swaps for unrelated parcels and settling outstanding liabilities from previous administrations.
“The people of the Cayman Islands deserve to know the full details of these negotiations and the implications they hold for our country, especially when public funds and ecologically valuable lands are at stake.”
The Progressives also highlighted issues with the scope of the Dart talks.
“The Government has not yet provided enough information about the arrangement for us to comment sensibly about any specifics. However, we would have concerns about any significant new agreements by a minority ‘lame-duck’ government.”
Related Videos
