EDITORIAL
The Cayman Islands System Leads to Political Confusion
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
For many years, the Cayman Islands electorate has had to wait until after
the general elections for the newly elected Members of the Legislative
Assembly to sit down and vote among themselves for the ministers of the
Executive Council, now called the Cabinet, and thus determine the government
in power.
While there have been some alliances in the past that have held up through
the process of selecting the ministers, often times the formation of the
government hinged on last-minute finagling, such as what occurred in the now
infamous “turtle stew” meeting during which the government was supposed to be
decided following the 2000 election.
Before the advent of Cayman’s two political parties, the United Democratic
Party and the People’s Progressive Movement, there were alliances like the
Unity Team, Team Cayman, the National Team and the Better Balance Team. Still,
however, independent candidates that were elected often played a key part in
the election of the new governments.
Sometimes, independent candidates with key votes in the House were swayed
to one side or the other with a promise of a Ministry post, and then much to
the surprise of some members of the electorate, that MLA suddenly was not
independent at all.
Of course, some election candidates claiming to be independent in the past
were never independent in the first place, having an unpublicised agenda all
along, which constituents did not learn of until after the election.
On the surface, the institution of the party system should eliminate a lot
of the guesswork in the upcoming 2004 election because it would seem that the
two parties would be able to run candidates for every district in Cayman,
allowing voters to know what a vote for a particular person might mean in the
formation of the next government.
However, as we are now finding out with a number of the candidates
declaring their intentions to run in the upcoming elections, there will still
be plenty of conjecture for voters in determining where a candidate’s true
allegiance lies.
Already, many voters are expressing scepticism over whether several of the
announced independent candidates are really independent, or more like moles
for one party or the other.
It could indeed be a good strategy for the parties to have independent
candidates from whom they know they can count on for votes if elected, but
some of what is happening has more to do with the system than clandestine
planning.
Party candidates are technically not supposed to announce their intentions
to run until after their party’s convention. This occurs much too late in some
people’s opinion, especially with regard to those challenging the incumbents,
who have the advantage of already being in the public eye.
What we are getting as a result is numerous people who say they would like
to run, or are thinking of running, and who might or might not run with one of
the political parties. Indeed, some of those already declared as independent
candidates could very well end up aligned with one the parties if they are
nominated to run at the convention.
In other jurisdictions, people who wish to seek office as particular party
members announce that they will seek the nomination of the party, and start
campaigning on that basis. If the party does not nominate these people, they
usually drop out of the election race.
However, in Cayman, it seems that independent candidates desire being
elected more than becoming a part of a political party, and should they not be
nominated, will likely run anyway, leaving the public to guess at their
allegiance should they be elected.
2004 will be the Cayman Islands’ first under the modern day party system,
and growing pains should be expected. We hope that the party hierarchies are
paying close attention to what is transpiring, so that a better system can be
developed to avoid some of the same confusion in 2008.
Back...
Click
here for reader comments...
| 
