Letter to the Editor
Gone with the Wind?
Pam DaCosta
Tara Rivers, (issue 41), is dead on; bingo!I especially liked her closing remarks. Perhaps we'd be furtherahead gathering funds to send her as an ambassador to the ForeignAffairs Committee of the UK Parliament to present our input!
As in the movie, 'Gone With the Wind', perhaps we need Tara toget back our Tara!! What representation will our elected membersgive to these isles?
This past June, I pestered like an uneasy gadfly, asking urgentquestions about our reciprocity status on the White Paper. Themembers I found went scurrying;
fleeing into dark shadows like I was that vaporizing Dan Ackroydcharacter of the movie 'Ghostbusters'. One told me he didn't know;to call back. Another said to find a certain member, he'd helpfor sure...but in front of him, I may as well have asked thatlittle gizmo's name that got stuck on Mars taking photos! Duh!
Why do members roll out of bed each morn, if they've no intentionsof recognising their own people! We may as well elect trees! Whyrun...is it the salary? Is it those 'big money' projects to linetheir pockets...which later adds stress to our environment? Isit to bar a rival from getting in? Isn't that like marrying aperson you don't really love just to spite a rival? Hey, it happens!Some say, this new government will make the difference. We shallsee.
Nothing's creepier (whilst cozily enjoying lively, upbeat, animatedbanter amongst warm friends) than an annoying Jekyll and Hyde,overbearing pessimist (relaxing in the corner that you got socarried away you forgot seeing), who now enters your conversationonly to sum up, second-guess and cram your ideas (light yearsahead of theirs) into the tiny quarters of their own little matchboxmind.
You start your moot point and planned punch line. They cut in,jumping to conclusions, overriding, finishing your sentence, completelytwisting your intended meaning, rendering your input void, anddrowning out your feeble comeback.
In true jest, by now your sides should be splitting, but your'spidey sense' is tingling and you glance up for the ninth occasionto see that furtive 360 degree roll of their eyes, (becoming evermore blaring), their nudge to the next person, and that 'cat thatate the canary' sneer you'd so love to wipe off their face.
It's been another game of 'gotcha!' And you've been the 'it'!Dare say anything, lest it tumbles out uncivilized! Gracious personthat you are, not wanting to appear overly sensitive, crude orpetty...you let it slide.
It dawns on your mind to connect the dots, and a definite patternemerges. Either that condescending person suffers an inferiority(or superiority) complex, has a real beef with you...or coldlyholds a sinister motive. You contemplate forsaking your friends.Is this their motive...to chase you away? Until you've put yourfinger on it, you'd resolve to steer clear, never trusting thatperson even if your life depended on it! Right?
But how do you react when the condescending person is your veryown government who repeatedly cuts, overrides and overshadowsyour input? Do you demurely let it slide yet again or finallytake the 'bull by the horns', vent and shout out your punch line?I concur with Tara; here's the "blow by blow" accountof how our isles' input has been rendered void in the White Paper:
1) We should have had district meetings informing us. These neverhappened.
2) We should have had a referendum! After all, we have constitutionalrecourse to a referendum as a legal right in order to have ourvoices heard!!
3) Elected members knew of the White Paper since 1996, but keptmum. And...the clincher was, Bermuda had asked Cayman from thatfar back: 'Let's discuss this, we're in the same boat'...but ourgovernment stuck its nose in the air.
4) Overseas UK meetings, attended by members, continued surreptitiously.
5) Twice, one member said on TV he "couldn't discuss."
6) A local newspaper report on April 11th 2000, brought news ourgovernment was "allowing our input, that it would form thebasis of their representation to Britain." Baroness Scotlandstated: "Britain would like to encourage wider debate onhuman rights among its overseas territories...and that maybe Caymanshould do what Bermuda had done...open up a Human Rights Commissionto debate it with a cross-section of the community to review publicpolicies and procedures in the context of international humanrights obligations'. Did you see such being formed for us?
7) Another report, April 14th 2000, brought us the abridged versionof the White Paper. The stated deadline at the bottom to get inour input was: May 15th 2000! One month! The White Paper SelectCommittee was opened, finally! But, for one month! And, as Tarapoints out in her 10th paragraph, this was even AFTER the writtensubmissions had been signed and sent to the UK! Yet...from 1998,Bermuda and other isles had already set up their Select Committeesfor their peoples' input on the White Paper...keeping them openuntil mid-June 2000!
8) And yet another report, May 12th 2000. The Governor stated:"As support for continued local debate, further clarificationon the White Paper is to be sought, for e.g. citizenship, to ensurelocal dialogue is founded on up-to-date and accurate informationon what is a complex and sensitive issue".
Huh? Debate? You mean, Radio Cayman's call-in talk show? Dialogue?Huh?
How? It's three days from the May 15th deadline! Was it an AprilFool's joke? Also, the Governor said: "On immigration issues,his report on the ongoing local survey soliciting input on theWhite Paper had been well received." Huh? You mean thoseimmigration matters Mario Ebanks complained about (Compass, March31st 2000), where our input into the Immigration Select Committeewas being ignored?
Our Governor went on to say: "They are very pleased in theUK that there is a consultation process going on here on the WhitePaper." Huh? What consultation process? Aren't you beginningto feel like Scooby Doo? Come hear what all the UK was told!!
9)A local newspaper report on May 12th 2000, stated that Bermuda,Gibraltar, St. Helena, Falklands and Pitcairn were meeting inMiami for their regional meetings on the White Paper on 4 - 5December, 2000! As other isles took their last allowable timeto fine-tune their details, our government had strangled our inputand finalized it before May!
The 'Human Rights Bill'...yet another mad rush to diminish, reduceand taper off what little say Caymanians have left in their ownisles! Firstly, where's our Referendum? Secondly, Article 20 ofthe Human Rights Bill (1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rightswhich the United Nations adopted), states: "No one may becompelled to belong to an association."
There! Neither 'Human Rights' itself, nor anyone, can force usto join them! Thirdly, Article 16 (3) states: "The familyis the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitledto protection by society and the State." Whew! They shotthemselves in the foot! Their own words prohibit them from forcingtheir gay laws upon us! What a scream!!
How much more of a blitzkrieg of input does Rev. Nicholas Sykes,the Ministers' Association, and us islanders need to print beforemembers recognize our input? Do we need to rent that huge WWF,'Grim Reaper' look-alike wrestler with the deep voice, concealedface and black hood to escort Tara or Julianna O'Connor to theUK to submit our input, and have him step out of the shadows,stick his finger in their faces and say: "Hey, enough isenough, the Caymanians speak, hear them!" Now that'd be cool!!
Funnily enough, a certain member flew to the UK a while back,bellowing for the 'Human Rights Bill'. When Truman warned himthe only way to get it was to have the gay laws included, didn'the reiterate he still wanted it. Isn't that strange?
Look at other members standing, hands folded. Are they waitinglike vultures...for our voices to die? Could it be it's the memberswho want it? Capitol Hill has more homosexuals than you can 'shakea stick' at. They've carefully orchestrated and massaged US citizens'minds for years to accept their 'alternative lifestyle'. So muchso, that upon Clinton's 'cigar fete', they screamed: "Impeachment!"
US politicians have trained America to become so accepting, thatto be straight, married and stumble into a pretty girl's arms,is now ten times worse than being gay!! Is this why our membersignore us? They await this legislation to go through to coverthem, when/if the public finds out about their lifestyles? IfI'm sniffing up the wrong tree, or pants leg(s), excuse me...butthis is where my doggy senses lead me!
Fair enough...if our voters want gay laws/rights, then let 'consensusby majority' reflect it! But members, don't just stand idly bylike tacit, stiff trees and watch the UK be fed that we had informativeguidance and ample chance for proper feedback when we didn't!
Firstly, we had no informative guidance. To top it all off, itwas you members who were responsible to explain the White Paperto us (via district meetings), but didn't! Instead, we had tofamiliarise ourselves with the White Paper (off internet and newspaperreports), draw our conclusions, write our input then scrambleto get it into our Select Committee within the ONE month!
How many did that? Not even Superman could! What's so gallingis that other isles got informative input from their own membersfirst, then they had two years that their Select Committees wereopen in order to get their feedback in!
A word of advice to the government. Stand up for our rights! Tellthe UK what input
we want included in any new initiatives of governance for theseislands.
No matter your agendae ...you pledged and are paid well to representthe people of these isles. Then represent us! As that rabbit in'Alice in Wonderland' says: "Well, just don't stand there,do something!"
Or...shall we send Tara? Well, somebody needs to stand up soon...otherwisewe're 'Gone with the Wind!'
Pamela DaCosta,
George Town