St. Eustatius Forum discusses cultural implications of 'partial integration' political status

Shujah Reiph Guest Speaker at Statia Town Hall Meeting

Great Bay/Marigot — St. Martin's cultural and community activist Shujah Reiph was the guest speaker at a town hall meeting in St. Eustatius on Saturday, November 3, 2012, according to Xiomara Balentina, president of the St. Eustatius/ St. Maarten based Foundation the Brighter Path.

The meeting which was organized by the Brighter Path Foundation is part of an ongoing awareness campaign about the constitutional situation of St. Eustatius, confirmed Balentina.

According to the president the people of St. Eustatius are very much concerned about the various changes taken place since the new constitution was established.

"Reiph was invited to address the theme Culture and ten, ten, ten, dealing with the partial integration of St. Eustatius into the Netherlands and the consequences it has had on the culture," said Balentina.

Reiph's presentation was broken down into two main points, "the undermining of the Statian nation's cultural identity/way of life and what the structural and historical reinforcement of colonialism will mean for the Statian nation."

The ninety minutes program included opening remarks by Xiomara Balentina, the main presentation by Shujah Reiph and a question and answering session by the general public.

"We were very pleased with attendance and we want to thank our partners who made the evening possible, Windward Island Airways (Winair), Country Inn, The Old Gin House, Super Burger and the people of St. Eustatius," concluded Balentina.

A number of people present voiced their dissatisfaction with the special municipality status governed by the Netherlands since 10 10 10. "All we have seen is a serious increase in taxes, since the change of status" said one entrepreneur present at the meeting.

The well attended evening saw a cross-section of the Statian population including educators, entrepreneurs, students, professionals and government officials. The town hall meeting was held at Super Burger in Oranjestad.

Guam Public Policy Institute coordinates leadership training

"To Educate. To Inspire. To Act."

The Public Policy Institute is a highly selective student internship program established by Speaker of the Guam Legislature Dr. Judith T. Won Pat. The program provides interns exposure to a vast network of distinguished leaders as well as to an array of professional and training opportunities for them to gain leadership, research, and work place skills and experiences.

Speaker of the Guam Legislature
Judith T. Won Pat

The Institute is a unique and rigorous program where interns have the opportunity to learn first-hand about the island's legislative process by participating in a variety of activities from bill research and writing, organizing and conducting public policy briefings, paging, and by providing executive-level staffing.

Interns also meet with distinguished leaders from a range of professional backgrounds and take fieldtrips to other branches of government in order gain a broader understanding of the separate but equal branches of of our democracy.

 Public Policy Institute Conducts Leadership Circles

The Leadership Circles (LCs) are a series of visits to each of the respective high schools designed to stimulate dialogue and foster a greater understanding, knowledge and appreciation of issues associated with social justice, decolonization diplomacy and political self-determination. LCs were recently facilitated by Dr. Carlyle Corbin, a United Nations recognized expert on self-determination and governance for over two decades. The LCs were conducted in a small group setting of students, teachers and community leaders.

The Public Policy Institute was instrumental in the coordination of the 2012 Global Forum which brought together students who assumed the role of diplomats from selected countries from specific regions of the world to debate an international issue of particular concern to economic, political and social development. The format is modeled after sessions of the United Nations General Assembly. Below are pictures of some of the action of the 2012 Global Forum.

Corruption: A Greater Problem In The United Kingdom

As part of the survey on corruption in Europe, Transparency International’s national chapter in the UK did a special focus on “corruption in the UK”. The results were damning: “Corruption is a greater problem in the UK than is currently recognised”, the research found.

NewAfrican

Osei Boateng reports

According to research conducted by Transparency International’s UK national chapter (TI-UK), “corruption is a greater problem in the UK than is currently recognised”, and while it is a “growing threat”, the government’s response is “inadequate”.

TI-UK’s special focus on “corruption in the UK was the most extensive of its type carried out in the country. It examined 23 sectors and institutions in Britain, and 48.1% of respondents said they did not think the government was effective in tackling corruption.According to the results, four institutions stood out as having particular problems with corruption: Parliament, political parties, prisons, and sports. Perhaps not surprisingly, political parties were perceived as the most corrupt in the country, followed by professional sport and Parliament.

What makes political parties more odious to the populace is that the UK is one of the few industrial democracies that do not have a ceiling on donations to political parties. As such, a high dependence on very large individual donations has increased the risk of corruption and exacerbated public unease about donors’ influence over politicians.

A good 86% of respondents said a seat in the House of Lords for a businessman who has made large donations to a political party was potentially corrupt. This view has been reinforced by recent scandals in Parliament involving MPs’ expenses, charges of nepotism against some MPs, the public’s continuing worries over lobbying companies, and the access of interest groups to MPs.

A scandal in March 2010 in which several MPs and former ministers offered their influence and contacts to journalists posing as representatives of a potential corporate employer interested in hiring them for lobbying work, has also exacerbated concerns about the “revolving door” between government and the private sector. Respondents think this is undermining trust in government, because of the potential conflicts of interest.

According to TI-UK’s research: “Discussion in the UK about the problem of corruption often tends to assume, rather complacently, that it is a problem that exists in other countries, particularly in the developing world. [But] corruption has been a problem in the UK for much of its history and it was widespread in the 18th and 19th centuries. Bribe-paying was common, and it is less than 200 years since a seat in Parliament could easily be bought or given as a gift. The UK is therefore not immune to corruption.

“[However] the growth of strong institutions in a democratic framework has led to a significant decline in corruption, and the UK of today performs relatively well in international tables and indices on corruption. For example, the UK was ranked 20th out of 180 in the 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index, although this had declined from 11th place five years ago.” Today research shows that bribery is relatively unusual in the UK, although in the institutions and sectors in which corruption is a particular risk, bribery is more common – for example in the construction sector and prisons.

“In general,” says TI-UK, “corruption in the UK takes forms other than bribery, but is nevertheless damaging. For example, cronyism and conflicts of interest are common forms of corruption ... and as in any country, corruption in the UK has victims. However, they may be less apparent in the UK because they are part of marginalised groups in society or because the corruption operates in intangible ways and so the victims are not immediately clear.”

From TI-UK’s research, the following categories of corruption are prevalent in the UK: Bribery, collusion, conflict of interest, cronyism or nepotism, fraud, gifts and hospitality, lobbying, money laundering, revolving door, abuse of authority or trading in influence, illegal disclosure of information and misuse of IT systems, and vote rigging.

Yet “there is a disturbing state of complacency, and even denial, about the existence of the problem in key UK institutions and sectors,” says TI-UK. “An overall theme that emerges from the research is that there is a general lack of awareness and understanding of corruption as a problem, both within institutions and more generally.”

As such the combination of the lack of awareness and the lack of information make it difficult to reach firmer conclusions about the scale of corruption in the UK. “Disturbingly,” says TI-UK, “there is a sense that corruption in the UK is increasing. This was the public perception in our national opinion survey.”

But inadequate government response has created a culture of impunity. TI-UK research found that in all areas, the corruption of key officials, often in the form of bribery, was a critical factor in allowing wrongdoing to take place.

Interestingly, the UK has several laws and regulations that cover offences related to corruption. The most prominent of these is the new Bribery Act passed in 2010. There is also the 2006 Fraud Act, and the 2002 Proceeds of Crime Act, and other anti-money laundering legislation.

There are also 12 different agencies or government departments with partial responsibility for anti-corruption activities plus more than 40 police forces in the country. But it is clear that they are not doing enough to share information and good practice on corruption prevention.

As such, TI-UK’s research found that the tentacles of organised crime extend to several UK sectors where criminal activity and corruption are inextricably linked. “The UK Border Agency has been targeted by organised crime, as have the police and the prison service. Social housing is [also] exploited by organised criminals either to facilitate drug trafficking or prostitution, or to house illegal immigrants who are involved in such activities.”

One interview respondent told the TI-UK research team: “Corruption is an enabler, like violence and intimidation are enablers. Criminals will use the lowest risk option, which is usually corruption [and] this can have a massive impact on the UK...”

In recent years, prominent cases of corruption such as match fixing in snooker, spot fixing in cricket, cheating in rugby, and irregular payments associated with the transfer of football players have made the UK public see sports as the second most corrupt sector in the country. Approximately one-third (24) of recent cases of corruption in sports has involved football.

Statistics

According to a leaked Scotland Yard investigation in 2006, there are around 1,000 corrupt prison officers currently working, with a further 600 officers being involved in an inappropriate relationship with a prisoner. In 2009 alone, there were 10,090 prosecutions under the 2006 Fraud Act. And in 2007, an inquiry into corruption in sports found that irregular payments had been made in 17 football transfers.

“It is currently estimated that 38,000 people are involved in organised crime in the UK, and such activities cost the economy anywhere between £20 billion and 30 billion per year,” says TI-UK. “A 2006 survey for the construction sector found that 41% of respondents had personally been offered a bribe at least once.”

TI-UK recommends that more action should be taken by the government to understand “the growing threat of corruption in key sectors of the UK”. Politicians, business, and institutions urgently need to understand that corruption must be tackled consistently and coherently. 

'Modernised' constitutions, same old colonial game in Cayman

Editorial

November 09, 2012

The art of control

In 2009, the Cayman Islands reached a great milestone in its democratic process by negotiating and holding the first ever national referendum to modernise its Constitution. This approved Constitution was subsequently accepted by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II Privy Council on 10 June 2009, and then came into effect later that year.

This was a significant accomplishment through which, as a country, we took the decision and followed through on the process to determine how we want to govern ourselves and live in the 21st century.

Interestingly, the Bill of Rights, which came into effect this week, was also part of that 2009 Constitution. This was another first and through it we now have an instrument that defines our fundamental human rights and freedoms and provides the framework through which such rights can be protected and defended.

The development and acceptance of a modernised Cayman Islands Constitution in 2009 all seemed to be aligning itself to the United Nations position in May of 2008, in which Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon pleaded with administering colonial powers to actively engage in the process of decolonisation of their member colonies.

While the 2009 Constitution did not do away with the age-old relationship between the Cayman Islands and the United Kingdom as our “mother country”, it certainly intended to, and basically provided for a greater level of autonomy in governance by local officials, elected by and for the people.

Yet, three years later after implementing our modernised Constitution, we find ourselves in an odd position. The United Kingdom has stepped in and taken control of approving our annual government budget. In addition, they will also be providing significant oversight over our decisions regarding public sector development projects.

While it is agreed that the UK bears ultimate responsibility for us as a colony, the actions by the UK appear to be a step back in the process of preparing a country for ultimate self-governance. Where does this align itself with the UN Secretary-General’s mandate of moving towards decolonisation?

This week, we watched in amazement as the Premier, Hon McKeeva Bush, took on the UK regarding the Framework for Fiscal Responsibility (FFR), and the capital project of developing the George Town cruise port by a Chinese company. At the end of what played out as a rancorous exchange of letters and press statements between Cayman, the Governor’s office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Premier assented to the FCO’s demands – implementation of the FFR without amendment and cessation of negotiations on the port project with China Harbour Engineering Company.

Most will agree that the FFR is a good thing for our country. Nonetheless, the one key area of contention pointed out by the Premier, namely that of the UK having ultimate decision over matters pertaining to our financial industry and investment affairs, definitely was not a step in the right direction. If the UK insists that we journey down a certain road against our wishes, and their decision ultimately has negative repercussions for the country, then the UK should be made liable to compensate us for any bad advice given, upon which we are forced to act.

The Premier is to be commended for his stance against the FCO on this point, as it is critical for the long-term viability of our country in the global financial arena.

While our constitution has been enhanced in recent years, the UK appears to still be up to its same old game of controlling colonies for their eventual gain. Only time will tell whether the decisions made by the UK on our behalf will truly be for our benefit, or theirs.

Latin American and Caribbean political parties call for U.N. examination of Bonaire as non self-governing territory

The Permanent Conference of Political Parties of Latin America and the Caribbean  (COPPPAL) at its 30th Session in October 2012 adopted a resolution calling on the United Nations Decolonisation Committee to examine the potential of re-listing Bonaire as a non self-governing territory. 

Bonaire became a "public entity" of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in 2010 following the territory's decision in referendum in favour of "direct ties" to the Kingdom. However, this designation was misinterpreted by the Dutch as a request for a form of political integration. Subsequent efforts by the territory to revisit the matter in referendum were resisted by the Kingdom. 

                 STATEMENT OF 

PARTIDO DEMOKRÁTIKO BONERIANO

Good morning to all our brothers in the Americas and the Caribbean who are here present. For us it is a great privilege to be here and to experience this extraordinary union, uniting political parties is to unite the voice of the peoples of the Americas and the Caribbean. And the final goal is to serve the peoples well-being and welfare unconditionally. 

I will share one experience I had in the lift of this hotel yesterday that will explain everything we want to present to you today. 

A colleague from Haiti whom I met in the lift tried to guess my country of origin and start mentioning almost every Caribbean country and following with the Central American and South American countries. Finally I told him no, I'm from Bonaire, which name he never heard before ... and that our language is Papiamentu but that we can speak English as well Spanish well so we can communicate without major difficulty to you all . This experience I’m sharing with you is our essence of our resolution that we are presenting to you today.
We are part of you; we are part of the family of the Americas and the Caribbean. We are now in a very serious situation. Our existence as original people of the island of Bonaire is in real danger of being exterminated. We were sent back in the colonial era, we are governed by the cosmopolitan state, which are imposing laws, regulations and more and are changing everything through their financial power and administrative mechanism. Our dignity and pride of our people is decreasing and our identity is disappearing every day our people is under this regime. Yes my friend of Haiti, and yes Haiti where the history of decolonization of the Americas started, and everyone else here today you are experiencing a systematic legal extermination of our Bonerian people. Maybe it was destiny for us to meet yesterday in this lift, and yes at this rate that they are executing this re-colonization and extermination plan on us, you shall witness the disappearance of one of your original people, one of the unique nations of the people of the Americas and the Caribbean.

We are here begging you to support and help us to meet this challenge. Our people do not see a way out or solution anymore... we are begging you to join us in this fight to help us to continue our emancipation process..

It is our human right ... and we do not have more time...

 **********

A resolution was subsequently adopted by COPPPAL  for consideration by the United Nations General Assembly:

                                            RESOLUTION ON BONAIRE

"The thirtieth session of the Permanent Conference of Political Parties of Latin America and the Caribbean  (COPPPAL) Plenary meeting in Mexico City on October 12, 2012 expresses its deepest concern over the condition of inferiority and political subordination that has been in effect on the island of Bonaire after the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles without the population of Bonaire have fully exercise their right to self-determination. 

COPPPAL is urging the Special Committee on Decolonization of the UN to examine the case of Bonaire and to determine whether in the light of re-colonizing maneuvers of the Netherlands should be declared by the General Assembly that Bonaire is still a non-autonomous territory under the international law, and therefore justifies the inclusion of Bonaire in the list of these territories, and requests the Netherlands to fulfill their decolonizing responsibilities under resolutions 1514 and 1514 of the General Assembly of 1960."

         

Guam Student Global Forum reaffirms right to self-determination

GF/Res/2012/4 

27th October 2012

RESOLUTION 

The Right to Self-Determination in the Twenty-First Century 

The Global Forum,

Having considered the question of the right to self-determination in the 21st Century; 

Having examined the United Nations Charter, in particular, Article 73 (b) which calls for countries which administer territories to develop full self-government in those territories through a process of self-determination; 

Recognizing that all available options for self-determination of the territories are valid as long as they are in accordance with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples, and on the basis of full and absolute political equality; 

Noting that the options of full and absolute political equality available to the peoples are political integration (statehood), free association and independence, and that the specific characteristics and the aspirations of the peoples of the territories require innovative approaches to self-determination; 

Convinced that the wishes and aspirations of the peoples of the territories should guide the development of their future political status, and that referendums and elections play an important role in ascertaining the wishes and aspirations of the people; 

Conscious of the vulnerability of the territories to natural disasters and environmental degradation; 

Aware that the United States of America (USA) maintains territories in the Pacific region including American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, and that both the USA and Canada have significant indigenous populations. 

Recognizing that the United States has adopted the International Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which affirms the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination; 

Bearing in mind that the countries of the African Group, in particular Comoros, Ghana, Mauritius, and Algeria have all previously exercised their right to self-determination, and have expressed their support for the further exercise of that right in the remaining territories; 

Noting that in the Asia and Pacific group, China has successfully re-integrated Hong Kong and Macau, that New Zealand maintains the territory of Tokelau while also having a free association relationship with the Cook Islands and Niue, that Fiji and Papua New Guinea have already exercised their respective rights to self-determination, and support the further exercise of that right in the remaining territories according to the wishes of the people; 

Also noting that Palau has exercised its right to self-determination by entering into a free association arrangement with the United States which gives the former territory full internal self-government with the USA controlling defense; 

Further noting that in the Latin American and Caribbean group the countries of Dominica and Jamaica have also exercised their right to self-determination, and continue to support the self-determination of their neighboring territories; 

Taking into account that Argentina is engaged in a sovereignty dispute with the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands/Malvinas, and that Ecuador continues to support the self-determination of the remaining territories; 

Recalling that the United Kingdom maintains the most territories throughout the world, mainly in the Caribbean region, that France is promoting a self-determination process with its territory of New Caledonia, that Spain maintains enclaves off the coast of Africa and that Denmark has entered into an innovative autonomous relationship with Greenland; 

1. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of the territories to self-determination, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and relevant human rights conventions, 

2. Also reaffirms that, in the process of decolonization, there is no alternative to the principle of self-determination, which is also a fundamental human right, as recognized under the relevant human rights conventions; 

3. Further reaffirms that it is ultimately for the peoples of the territories themselves to determine freely their future political status, and calls for the development of public education programmes for the territories in order to foster an awareness among the peoples of their right to self-determination in conformity with the legitimate political status options based on the principles of full political equality; 

4. Calls for the establishment of programs of information on self-government in the territories to advance the process of self-determination, and to take all steps necessary to enable the peoples of the territories to exercise their right to self-determination; 

5. Reaffirms the importance of 1) preserving the cultural identity of the territories, of 2) the strengthening and diversification of the territorial economies, and of 3) conserving and protecting the environment; 

6. Calls for effective measures to safeguard and guarantee the inalienable rights of the peoples of the territories to their natural resources, to establish and maintain control over the future development of those resources, and to protect the property rights of the peoples of the territories.

Is There a Case for Economic Development in the British Virgin Islands?

By Benito Wheatley 

ceo@wheatleyconsultinggroup.com

Economic development has emerged as one of the British Virgin Islands' (BVI's) most polarising issues at a time when a consensus is desperately needed in order to stabilise the economy and begin laying a new foundation for future growth. 

At issue is the potential impact on society of large scale capital projects and whether their benefits will outweigh their costs. 

This concern raises the legitimate question of the appropriate role of economic development in the economy. Such a determination requires the input of a cross-section of stakeholders in society who must weigh the balance between economic development and other economic drivers in stimulating economic growth. 

One key consideration is the state of the economy. Recent Ministry of Finance Economic Reviews indicate that the territory's economic outlook has improved since the global financial crisis, but the economy remains in a fragile state of recovery. 

The crisis did considerable damage to the financial services and tourism industries that account for nearly 50% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). 

Between 2008 and 2009, GDP growth contracted by an unprecedented 11.6%. Tourist arrivals fell 13% and company incorporations dropped 20%. 

The construction industry was particularly hard hit as both private and public sector demand for building and public works related activity plummeted. Unemployment within the industry rose 14% over the period. 

The effects of the crisis are still being felt four years on as employment, revenue and commerce remain below pre-crisis levels; and economic growth, a key indicator of the economy's health, remains subdued on weak demand in traditional markets such as the United States (US) and Europe whose economies continue to grapple with severe debt and unemployment problems. 

Uncertainty in financial markets and stronger financial regulation at global level are also a drag on the economy. 

International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecasts suggest that these trends will continue until global conditions improve, posing a serious challenge for the financial services and tourism industries in the short- and medium-terms. 

In this context economic development is needed to help boost economic growth and strengthen the economy's fragile recovery until international conditions stabilise. 

Economic development can help drive employment and commerce and give a much needed boost to the construction industry. It can also support long-term economic growth through the laying down of critical infrastructure needed to improve the efficiency of the economy. 

An international consensus is emerging that economic development is a necessary economic stimulus when demand in the economy is weak. 

International trends also indicate that the key to successful economic development is inclusivity and sustainability. 

The public and other stakeholders must have an opportunity at the conceptual phase of a particular capital project to express their views, which should be weighed in its design. Efforts must also be made for local participation in the investment side of the project and its development. 

From a sustainability perspective, capital projects should be carried out on a scale commensurate with the society’s capacity to satisfactorily manage the social, economic and environmental costs involved. 

Economic development can play a positive role in the economy, but it must be executed in a manner that benefits the society as a whole. This can only be done if the right balance is found between sustainability, inclusivity and development. 

During this extraordinary period it is imperative that the society quickly reaches a consensus on economic development if the territory is to consolidate its economic recovery and lay the foundation for future growth.

Turks & Caicos ruling party, deposed by the British, wins elections

British had abolished elected Progressive National Party government over three years ago. 

TCI - PNP reclaims Gov't in Turks and Caicos

TCI Sun

PNP LEADER DR. RUFUS EWING

In what was the closest general elections in the history of the Turks and Caicos Islands, the Progressive National Party (PNP) has reclaimed the government, winning eight (8) seats to the People’s Democratic Movement’s (PDM) seven (7).

The PNP’s razor-thin victory in the Friday November 9th poll, came in the form of six constituency seats and two At-Large (country-wide) seats.

The PDM won four (4) constituency seats and three (3) At-Large seats.

PDM Leader Oswald Skippings, a former chief minister, suffered a shocking defeat, placing eighth among 11 At-Large candidates.

When the votes in the 10 electoral districts were tallied just after 1 a.m. on Saturday November 10th, the PNP won six seats: George Lightbourne in Grand Turk North; Norman Saunders in South Caicos; DonHue Gardiner in North and Middle Caicos; Akeirra Missick in Leeward; Portia Stubbs-Smith in The Bight; and Amanda Missick in Cheshire Hall/Richmond Hills.

The PDM won four constituency seats: Delroy Williams in Wheeland; Sean Astwood in Five Cays; Goldray Ewing in Blue Hills; and Edwin Astwood in Grand Turk South. The PDM won three of the At-Large seats (Sharlene Cartwright, Derek Taylor and Josephine Connolly), while the PNP won with Dr. Rufus Ewing and Washington Misick.

The overall election results were delayed because the At-Large numbers had to be recounted and the final results were only announced at 5:30 p.m on Saturday November 10th.

The provisional standings of the At-Large seats are as follows:

1. Sharlene Cartwright Robinson – PDM – 3,427 votes (provisional)
2. Rufus Ewing – PNP – 3,252 votes (provisional)
3. Derek Taylor – PDM – 3,191 votes (provisional)
4. Washington Misick – PNP – 3,107 votes (provisional)
5. Josephine Connolly – PDM – 3,023 votes (provisional)
6. Carolos Simons – PNP – 2,899 votes (provisional)
7. Samuel Harvey – PDM – 2,896 votes (provisional)
8. Oswald Skippings – PDM – 2,894 votes (provisional)
9. Wayne Garland – PNP – 2,806 votes (provisional)
10. Royal Robinson – PNP – 2,700 votes (provisional)
11. Oswald Simons – IND – 233 votes (provisional)

PDM leader Oswald Skippings has asked for a recount and this will take place on Monday November 12th at Dillon Hall, Grand Turk.

Petition to recall Governor Ric Todd

By Vivian Tyson, Senior SUN Editor

An on-line petition to have Governor Ric Todd recalled by Queen Elizabeth II, has been gaining momentum.

The petition, which can be found at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/send-governor-ric-todd-back-to-the-uk/signatures, says that Governor Ric Todd has demonstrated a persistent and arrogant disregard for the customs, culture and people of the Turks & Caicos Islands since his arrival.

It noted: “The offensive decisions, strategies and changes to our laws that have been manipulated by Ric Todd are too numerous to mention here but include; a) Lowering the age of consent to 16 for boys to engage in a homosexual act despite our feelings to the contrary; b) Unilaterally changing our laws to permit the caging of dolphins despite our feelings to the contrary; c) Pressuring the country on behalf of questionable developers for a substantial increase in the building height limitation on Grace Bay despite

our feelings to the contrary; d) Supporting the illegal dredging of the Leeward Channel and the National Park for the benefit of one wealthy and influential developer despite the damage it will cause to our reefs and objections of the people of this country to the contrary.

Todd, who came to the Turks and Caicos Islands in September 2011, has ruffled many feathers country-wide since his appointment.

Asked for a comment on the calls to have the Governor recalled, his spokesman, Neil Smith, said, “His Excellency Governor Ric Todd continues to enjoy the confidence of UK Ministers, Government officials and persons across Turks and Caicos society and family of islands. He has delivered on his promises. Most notably that he would do everything he could to ensure that Elections would take place in the Turks and Caicos in 2012. This goal was by no means certain when he first arrived here in September 2011. That he has marshalled his team, colleagues and officials here in the TCI and in the UK to jointly achieve this milestone is certainly to the credit of everyone involved.

Smith added: “The reforms brought about required a remarkable body of work to be carried out over the past three years, and the last 12 months in particular. This should not be underestimated. The Islands will benefit from reforms in almost every aspect of life here: the commitment by the Government to always run a surplus budget; improved financial management, accountability and reporting of information; the improvements to Crown Land Policy; a clearer and simpler way to acquiring T&C Islander status; holding to account those responsible for the issues detailed in the Commission of Inquiry; amongst others. 

“Clearly, this provides a once in a generation opportunity for the people of these Islands to build on this platform by firstly electing a new Government next week and then working together, the fresh administration, Governor Todd, Islanders and the UK, to build a brighter, better future for everyone in the Turks and Caicos in 2013 and beyond.” 

In a previous interview with SUNtv, when asked about calls for him to be removed, Todd stated: "I would say that all of the time that I've been here, I have began to have very productive and effective relationships with people within the government and outside of government.''

The Constitution clearly sets out what the rights and powers of the governor are. I am confident that anyone who is involved in the constitution and constitutional bodies will play their part in working together for the TCI to be a prosperous, effective, well run country. I am confident that the FCO has confidence in me so I have no concerns on that score and you can see any way that in the constitution my appointment is at her majesty's pleasure and as far as I know I enjoy Her Majesty's pleasure."

Dutch cabinet wants to limit Dutch Caribbean migration

The Daily Herald

THE HAGUE--The new Dutch Government is planning to regulate the registration of people from Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten in The Netherlands.

This is stated in the Governing Accord the conservative VVD party and the Labour Party PvdA presented on Monday.

"Based on criteria that Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten have in place, including a test of a criminal record and income, we will come with a proposal to regulate the registration of residents from those countries in The Netherlands," it is stated in the accord.

The initiative to regulate the registration of people from Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten comes from the VVD. Member of the Second Chamber of the Dutch Parliament André Bosman of the VVD presented a law proposal in July to restrict the registration of people from the three overseas countries.

Bosman's law proposal states that people from Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten must comply with a number of requirements before they can register at a municipality in The Netherlands.

The law, if approved by the Second Chamber, will require people from the three overseas countries to obtain residence permits. The residence permit would be denied if, among other things, a person does not speak sufficient Dutch, does not have sufficient income and a starting qualification/degree, or has a criminal record.

The PvdA objected to the law proposal initially. Member of Parliament Martijn van Dam of the PvdA stated in July that his party did not agree with differentiating among Dutch citizens based on their descent.

Van Dam said on Tuesday that it concerned a variation of registration requirements. He hoped for cooperation on this issue from the three overseas countries.

"We have always said that we find it unwise for young, poorly-educated Antilleans to come to The Netherlands without work. We have been looking for possibilities to prevent these youngsters from ending up in trouble here. The cabinet is now going to work on a variant for the registration requirements," he said.

According to Van Dam, there is a big difference between a registration prohibition and registration requirements. He said the plans of the new government have to do with requirements based on, for example, having a criminal record or not having a degree or work. "This comes close to our point of view that youngsters must complete a social formation programme before they can come to The Netherlands," he said.

MP Bosman said on Tuesday that he was happy with the statement in the Governing Accord. "It is too bad that Curaçao doesn't want to cooperate in the process to regulate the migration of poorly-educated citizens to The Netherlands. They don't want to discuss this issue, so we decided to take it upon ourselves to regulate this," he said.

Bosman received the advice on his law proposal from the Advisory Council recently. He said the Council's advice was being analysed. He hopes to submit the law proposal to the Second Chamber for handling by January 1, 2013.

"Siding With France In The Pacific" by Nic Maclellan

Newmaltida.com

Part 2

Independence campaigner Oscar Temaru

Australia has remarkably strong ties with France in the Pacific - and they are stifling the drive toward independence of countries like New Caledonia. Nic Maclellan on how Australia is holding back decolonisation.

As Australia prepares to take up a seat on theUN Security Council in 2013, the UNdecolonisation agenda will affect Australia’s relations with neighbouring Pacific countries.

However recent actions by the Gillard Government suggest that Canberra has chosen sides with France and the United States on this often-ignored agenda at the United Nations.

From 1946, the United Nations has maintained a list of non-self-governing territories seeking political independence. Just 16 territories remain on the list, including five Pacific islands, though others are seeking to be re-listed.

Twenty five years ago, at the height of the conflict between supporters and opponents of independence, Australia supported New Caledonia’s successful bid for re-inscription on the list of countries to be decolonised. This French Pacific dependency has been scrutinised by the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation ever since — the governments of France and New Caledonia even invited the UN committee to hold its regional seminar in Noumea in 2010.

In French Polynesia, the coalition government led by long-time independence campaigner Oscar Temaru has been seeking the same sort of international support. In spite of tough economic times at home — with falling numbers of tourists and changing French subsidies after the end of nuclear testing — Temaru has been seeking regional and international support to be re-listed with the United Nations decolonisation process.

Since Temaru was first elected President in 2004, there has been a slow but significant shift in local opinion. Last year, the Territorial Assembly in Papeete narrowly voted for the first time to support Temaru’s call for re-inscription. In August 2012, the synod of theEglise Protestante Maohi (EPM) — the Protestant church that is the largest denomination in French Polynesia — voted for the first time to support re-inscription. The Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC) and World Council of Churches (WCC) have alsosupported the call.

In spite of this, Australia has sided with Paris to reject French Polynesia’s call for increased UN scrutiny. Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs Richard Marles, in an interview published in Islands Business magazine, recently said, "We absolutely take our lead from France on this."

In recent years, Australia and France have signed a series of agreements that cement relations on defence, aid co-operation and joint exploration for oil and gas reserves in the waters between Australia and New Caledonia — culminating last January in a Joint Statement on Strategic Partnership.

For many years, Australia and France have expanded defence co-operation in the Pacific, through port visits, joint military exercises, arms deals and meetings between senior military officers. The Southern Cross military exercises held every two years in New Caledonia are a key part of regional military co-operation, with US marines joining Australia and French troops in the latest wargames in October.

Since 1992, the France-Australia-New Zealand (FRANZ) agreement has provided a mechanism for joint humanitarian and maritime surveillance operations in the South Pacific. The 2009 Australia-France Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) strengthens our defence partnership, but is underlined by French efforts to increase arms sales to Australia: by 2006, Australia was the second largest purchaser of French armaments in the world. Eurocopter, a subsidiary of the giant European Aeronautic Defence and Space company (EADS) is successfully competing with American arms manufacturers to sell helicopters and other equipment to the Australian Defence Force (ADF).

France and Australia are also co-operating in joint exploration of the waters between Queensland and New Caledonia. Geoscience Australia and French research agencies have conducted joint surveys of the ocean floor near the Capel and Faust Basins, looking for sediments that would indicate deep water reserves of oil and gas. In March 2010, the signing of a "Declaration of Intention between Australia and France (on behalf of New Caledonia) over Coral Sea Management" signalled increased joint operations over reef ecology and maritime resources in these waters. For some, the sight of France as the administering power making decisions over New Caledonia’s resources brings back memories of Australia’s deal with Indonesia over the oil reserves of the Timor Gap.

A further sign of Australia-France relations is a partnership agreement signed in July 2011 between Australia’s aid agency AusAID and the French equivalent Agence française de développement (AFD). This agreement opens the way for co-operation in Africa and Afghanistan, but also allows for joint programs in the Pacific.

All these agreements culminated in the signing of the Joint Statement of Strategic Partnership in January 2012. At the time, Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd and his French counterpart Alain Juppe signed the agreement in Paris, which highlights joint commitments on Afghanistan, nuclear non-proliferation, terrorism, global economic reform and the Pacific.

Our global partnership with France seems to be affecting our policies in the islands region. Even though many Pacific states have publicly stated their support for French Polynesia’s bid for re-inscription at the United Nations, the August 2012 meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum re-affirmed the Australian position, calling for further dialogue between Paris and Papeete.

A month later, however, many Pacific leaders lined up at the UN General Assembly to publicly support French Polynesia’s right to self-determination. The leaders of Samoa, Solomon Islands, Fiji and Vanuatu explicitly called for action on decolonisation. Vanuatu’s Prime Minister Sato Kilman said, "I call on the independent and free nations of the world to complete the story of decolonisation and close this chapter. At this juncture, I urge the United Nations not to reject the demands for French Polynesia’s right to self-determination and progress."

The same month, with Fiji’s Foreign Minister in attendance, the 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Tehran issued a new policy on decolonisation, which noted: "The Heads of State or Government affirmed the inalienable right of the people of French Polynesia — Maohi Nui to self-determination in accordance with Chapter XI of the Charter of the United Nations and the UN General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV)."

With the other French Pacific dependency of New Caledonia scheduled to hold a referendum on its future political status after 2014, the question of France’s role in the South Pacific isn’t going away soon.