When we commented last week on the recent letter written to the Leader of Government Business, Hon. McKeeva Bush, by Carlos de Serpa Pimentel, the chairman of the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners in the Cayman Islands (STEP), we remarked that it was a particularly courageous letter to write because, apart from anything else, Mr Bush does not take such criticism kindly.

In an example of no sooner said than done, later the same day Mr Bush obliged by behaving as we predicted and lashing out at STEP in the Legislative Assembly for “playing politics”.

Whilst this is the good old standby protest of politicians everywhere when they cannot think of anything better to say, Mr Bush and others should realise that rational, well-founded criticism of government policy is not in and of itself “playing politics.”

This newspaper frequently criticises whichever administration happens to be in power at any given time but there is no political motivation, because we have no political agenda, unless one considers our continued advocacy of good governance in the Cayman Islands as “political”.

Indeed, we might be regarded as an equal opportunity critic of the policies of both political parties because it is not unknown for each to complain about us at the same time, leading us to think that we must be doing something right.

Some might regard Mr Pimentel’s comments as uninvited and unwelcome criticism, but in our view it also represents a rare example of someone willing to embrace the greater national good, this time in words not actions, regardless of any personal repercussions from individuals in government.

If any organisation or individual forms a contrary view as to government policy, should not they be entitled to speak out without fear of subsequently being attacked in the privileged confines of the Legislative Assembly?

This, of course, is quite familiar ground for us – to the point where we have grown to expect it – but possibly not so for others.

We would like to see more local organisations and professional bodies voicing their opinion on current events, especially in areas as crucially important as the financial survival of the government and the impact on the economy of its attempts to raise additional revenue.

It is surely not hard to see that much of the recent Budget adversely affects small businesses in the Cayman Islands, which are usually regarded in most countries as an engine of growth – to be nurtured and encouraged, not treated as a cash cow for the convenience of a government that does not want to trim its own fat.

Where then does the Chamber of Commerce stand on the substantially increased taxes that fall primarily on small businesses and their lower paid workers? Does the Chamber’s deafening silence mean that its leaders are afraid of being accused of “playing politics”? In reality, where is the “politics” in doing the job you have been elected or chosen to do, namely, supporting and speaking out on issues affecting members, especially the small business community, or does the Chamber only focus on “big business”, which is not nearly as negatively impacted by the budget as the already struggling smaller entrepreneurs?

The various organisations within the legal fraternity have not been slow in coming forward to voice their opposition to the new legal aid proposals – are they to be accused of playing politics?

Perhaps the organisations in question also have a view on the direction in which the country is heading economically. If so, why should they not express it, or will they also be accused of playing politics?

Granted, a prominent local practitioner associated with STEP also happens to be the chairman of the opposition People’s Progressive Movement (PPM) but the message contained in the letter to Mr Bush by Mr Pimentel was not an overtly political one. Also, we have no way of knowing whether or not Mr Bush is accurately portraying the situation when he claims that STEP voiced no such concerns during the “consultation” period leading up to the Budget.

Of course, “consultation” here very often means the mechanism whereby one person’s view is officially validated and adopted by a meaningless, so-called consultative process.

In any event, we are glad that one organisation at least had the temerity to step on some political toes and we encourage others to do the same.