Without a doubt, the development of a new constitution for these Islands is long overdue. It is of utmost necessity that we therefore create a document that can take this country forward, and the sooner the debate on the constitutional review issue begins, the better.

Meanwhile, it is rather surprising that the current administration and the Opposition seem hesitant to define what they would like to see emerge as future governance for the Islands.

Of course, there has been the regular banter in recent weeks between the United Democratic Party (UDP) and the ruling party, People’s Progressive Movement (PPM), about who was invited to talk to whom and who was privy to what information was dispensed during which meetings in the course of the early discussions.

However, a clear definition of what should be included in this all- important legal document is sorely lacking.

Although both parties have made vague references to the constitution in their manifestos, neither party has offered a clear position on what they do and do not support.

Moreover, Hon Alden McLaughlin, Minister of Education, has made it clear in recent press briefings that his party’s position has advanced. But neither he nor the Leader of Government Business, Hon Kurt Tibbetts, has precisely stated what they believe is in the best interest of the Cayman Islands regarding the new constitution.

The Government’s argument is that they do not want to presume what the people will want, which may appear to be rather politically mature on the surface. However, if one delves further, one would ask – as leaders of the country, shouldn’t the PPM at least convey their opinions and beliefs on the matter of the constitutional review?

If there is to be a referendum on the draft document that materialises from the public debates, it is important that all parties lobby for the installation of the fundamentals of the constitution and for the composition of the ideology behind it.

There is no doubt that shaping a constitution is a serious matter for the country and the achievement of the best possible draft proposal will be the Government’s primary object. But surely both parties should give the people an idea of what they think the best movement on the issue would be. For example - if we take the two political extremes as a starting point, we have complete independence from the United Kingdom and at the other side, continued dependency on the British Government.

There are elements of the constitutional review that will more than likely cause controversy. For instance, Mr McLaughlin noted in a recent press briefing, many Caymanians are concerned about the formation of a human rights charter for the country.

And while people may be worried about what Mr McLaughlin described as third-generation rights, it is interesting to note that he did not comment on where the PPM’s position was. The human rights factor alone raises numerous questions about where both the PPM and the UDP are exactly positioned.

Should Cayman sign up to every human rights convention that exists, or should the rights that the UK has signed bind us, or should it be done in a ‘piecemeal’ fashion?

Foreign policy is another important issue. It is clear that there are certain areas where the Cayman Islands needs to have a higher profile on the international stage, especially when it comes to dealing with treaties on international finance.

Of the numerous issues that should be discussed and debated, when will the political parties start telling us what they believe is the way forward for the country?

It is possible that the Government will have the constitution in shape before the next election, but not a certainty. Therefore in addition to having a referendum, the new constitution should play an integral part of the next election campaign.

Adopting a position on the development of a new constitution is based on politics, and it is time our politicians let the electorate know where they stand. Because at the end of the day, it should be the people’s — and not the politicians’ choice.